Transcript: MMR Vaccines Kill More Than Measles, The Data

Marty Bent [0:07] You've had a dynamic where money's become freer than free.

Nic Hulscher [0:09] Let me talk about a Fed just gone nuts, all, all the central banks going nuts. So it's all acting like safe haven.

Marty Bent [0:18] I believe that in a world where central bankers are tripping over themselves to devalue their currency, Bitcoin wins. In the world of fiat currencies, Bitcoin is the victor.

Nic Hulscher [0:29] I mean, that's part of the bull case for Bitcoin.

Marty Bent [0:31] If you're not paying attention, you probably should be.

Nic Hulscher [0:33] Probably should be. Probably should be.

Marty Bent [0:34] Nick Holscher, welcome back to the show, sir.

Nic Hulscher [0:38] Thanks for having me.

Marty Bent [0:40] Well, it's crazy times out there. I DM'd you, I think about a week ago when Governor Shapiro was on his media tour trying to fearmonger the public in Pennsylvania about 2 measles deaths. in the state as a citizen of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, that frightened me a lot, especially considering the draconian laws they were trying to push through and rules they were trying to push through as it pertains to this state or the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's ability to intrude in schools and houses if they deem somebody not on— or they deem that somebody is not caught up in the vaccine schedule. So I figured we'd start there. What's going on in Pennsylvania? It looks like Josh Shapiro has some egg on his face, but that story has somewhat been brushed under the rug of the 24-hour news cycle. But I don't want to let it go. How did that play out in your mind? What exactly happened?

Nic Hulscher [1:39] Yeah, so this was an absolute disaster debacle. So basically what occurred was, you know, Pennsylvania announced 2 measles-associated deaths, and none of them appeared to have actually been caused by measles. This whole story appears to have been fabricated. And so the first so-called measles death that was confirmed by the coroner was actually due to a ruptured spleen, a laceration. The infant unfortunately died of internal bleeding. It had nothing to do with measles. Again, confirmed by the county coroner at Lancaster County. The second so-called death, there's been absolutely no case details, no age, no contributing factors, no clinical vignette report. There's been absolutely nothing. And so we can probably assume the second one also was not a measles death, if it was not entirely fabricated.

Nic Hulscher ⋮ So that settles that question. They were seemingly wanting to push measles deaths in order to push maximal MMR vaccine uptake because it is rapidly collapsing as people don't trust it anymore. And what I did 2 days ago was I looked in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System for 2026 MMR vaccine deaths. And it's 2026, there's now been zero measles deaths and at least 3 MMR vaccine-linked deaths, including a 1-year-old that received MMR and a battery of other vaccines and died a day later of cardiac arrest. Again, in, in, in the CDC FDA Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System. The second one was a 1-year-old girl She died of disseminated rubella after the MMR vaccine because the MMR vaccine contains live attenuated rubella virus.

Nic Hulscher ⋮ That vaccine rubella unfortunately infected her vital organs and led to multi-organ failure. And then the third death was in a 76-year-old woman. She received MMR. For some reason, she was very old. She didn't need an MMR vaccine, but she got it anyways, and she died of vaccine measles. So literally, the live attenuated measles virus spread into her lungs, and she died of respiratory failure. They looked in her lungs, and they found the vaccine strain of measles. And so basically, The vaccine is deadlier than the disease basically in every given year. And lastly, we published a study looking at MMR vaccine deaths and compared it to measles deaths over the past 30 years.

Nic Hulscher ⋮ And we found there's been 2,600% more MMR vaccine deaths than measles deaths since the 1980s. Or since the 1990s. So it's absolutely ridiculous. So these MMR shots are causing way more deaths than measles is, and the media never, never blasts out sympathy for any of these MMR vaccine deaths. They just sweep it under the rug while at the same time propagating fabricated measles deaths.

Marty Bent [5:24] Yeah, it was funny watching the, uh, uh, what's the show from the '70s with, uh, Marcia?

Nic Hulscher [5:32] The Brady Bunch?

Marty Bent [5:33] The Brady Bunch. That clip of the, the measles episode where they were having a measles party, um, just to get natural immunity from it. It's funny how common it was back then. It was just accepted, like, yeah, measles is, uh, a virus that exists. You can get it, and, um, most people just put up with it and actually looked forward to natural immunity. And I, I guess one of the questions I have is, how deadly is measles?

Nic Hulscher [6:00] Yeah, so measles is not deadly. It's very mild. It's more mild than the flu, has a much lower case fatality rate. And yeah, children used to have measles parties because they wanted to get immunity for it. And it was a very mild, self-limited illness. And, you know, you see these hospitalization rates that the mass media likes to propagate with measles. Well, those children are hospitalized for measles for containment measures, right? They're told to go into the hospital so they don't spread it, not because they're, you know, sick and dying. And so that falsely inflates that hospitalization rate. And most, vast majority of people will get over it just fine. It, uh, and in fact, infection with natural measles is associated, and you can't even make this up, with, with reduced cancer risk later in life.

Marty Bent [7:00] Yeah, it's, uh, it's insane. And bringing it back to Pennsylvania specifically, one thing that really, uh, perturbs me makes me angry is a lot of— I think as somebody who grew up in Pennsylvania and understands the politics of the Commonwealth, the Amish are a problem for the people in power because they are this isolated group, a control group, if you will, that have been doing things their own way for many decades. They're one of the fastest-growing populations in the country. And I think the state, and particularly the governor's office, views the Amish as a problem because you have an example of a cohort of people who have not engaged in any of the vaccine schedule, and they seem to be thriving.

Marty Bent ⋮ And it goes beyond just the vaccine schedule and gets into clean food too. There's a farmer, an Amish farmer— Amos Lee, or Amos Miller, excuse me, who's been attacked by the state for years. I think, thankfully, within the last month, the case against him has been dropped, but they've really been targeting the Amish because it's a narrative violation, I think.

Nic Hulscher [8:17] Yeah, exactly. They don't want— they want to smear the Amish and avoid studying them because they'll find they're much less sick, they have way less chronic disease, and they have way less autism. Because they don't take large batteries of vaccines. They don't— they're not subjected to 72 doses by age 18 and 32 doses by age 2. And so they're far healthier. And yeah, they don't want people to know that, that a group that's not following public health recommendations is actually faring much better.

Marty Bent [8:55] Okay. And a lot of this seems reactionary from Pennsylvania and a number of other states in the Northeast, particularly reactionary to the Department of Health and Human Services, which has relaxed the vaccine schedule this year. I think many people were waiting with bated breath for something to happen around the vaccine schedule with RFK at the helm. We finally got something that seems like a lot of states are Reacting negatively. Another thing that we should bring up with Pennsylvania too, being a Philadelphia— a citizen of Philadelphia, born and raised on the playground where I spent most of my days, the big pharma city, big pharma state. And that was one of the frustrating things a couple weeks ago that if you're on the outside looking in, you may not understand that the pharma industry is pretty massive in Pennsylvania.

Nic Hulscher [9:50] Right, right. Definitely. Yeah. Pharma-captured states, you know, they're going to continue to push fraudulent and dangerous vaccine recommendations despite what the new HHS guidance is. And they're going to be following the American Academy of Pediatrics vaccine recommendations, which are extremely dangerous. which includes injecting children with over 72 doses by age 18, none of which were properly tested in a pre-licensing placebo-controlled trial, and none of which were tested in cumulative fashion. So they don't know what happens when you inject that much into a child. And so they're following recommendations of American Academy of Pediatrics, which is being now sued in a federal lawsuit, a federal RICO lawsuit, racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act lawsuit for running a vaccine racketeering scheme for the past 30 years. And so this, this is the situation we're in now.

Marty Bent [11:01] Really? I did not under— I did not realize this was going on. What, what is the, the thesis behind the RICO case? What are they claiming?

Nic Hulscher [11:10] Yeah, so basically what's occurred, or what they're alleging this lawsuit is that basically the American Academy of Pediatrics receives large sums of money from Merck, other childhood vaccine makers, Pfizer, and Moderna. And in exchange for that money, they push dangerous and fraudulent vaccine recommendations. And so basically they're pushing untested and dangerous vaccines, including COVID-19 mRNA shots on infants. in exchange for that industry money. And so this does appear to be a racketeering scheme at the cost of American health and American lives. And it's an organized operation.

Marty Bent [12:04] What's the state of that trial? Is it still in discovery?

Nic Hulscher [12:08] Well, that lawsuit was filed a few months ago. There has not been any updates since. It was filed by Children's Health Defense's legal team.

Marty Bent [12:21] They've been doing incredible, incredible work. And again, going back to the 24-hour news cycle, that's the one thing— that's why I have a lot of people— we've had Jessica Rose on recently, um, who was talking about, um, the, the fact that Fauci knew that the COVID mRNA vaccine was affecting the placentas of women and affecting pregnancies. And a lot of people in the comments are like, why do you keep bringing people on to discuss this stuff? So we need accountability. Not only do we need accountability, but it seems like because of the 24-hour news cycle, people have short-term amnesia and forget what we just went through with the COVID mRNA vaccines.

Marty Bent ⋮ And they're pushing new mRNA vaccines. And I know that you've been on top of studies as it pertains to the mRNA vaccines. Yesterday, he tweeted out that a study found that mRNA vaccines could induce or accelerate cancer via 35 distinct mechanisms. There is this push for the mRNA flu vaccine right now, and it seems like we're speedrunning into this mRNA vaccine reality when we don't really have any clarity about whether or not we can have any certainty that these things are safe at all.

Nic Hulscher [13:44] Yeah, so they're pushing mRNA now for everything— for flu, for cancer, for COVID, and for RSV. And they're developing it for every other disease you can think of, including asthma. I mean, chronic diseases and other sorts of things. So with the cancer study we just published, it actually is the most comprehensive to date looking at the link between COVID vaccines and cancer. And yeah, we found there's 35 distinct mechanisms that mRNA technology can promote or induce or accelerate cancer. And it spans so many different things. It spans genomic integration, insertional mutagenesis, transcription errors. So basically the messenger RNA is read incorrectly by your ribosomes and makes monster proteins.

Nic Hulscher ⋮ that contribute to cancer. It screws up what's called the protein-to-protein interactive network. And so proteins are not communicating, the body's not communicating as it should be. It's causing hyperinflammation, which primes the body for cancerous growth. It turns off tumor suppressor genes, p53 and BRCA, so the body cannot detect these cancers anymore. And it exhausts the T cells, which are essential for fighting off cancers and tumors. And so you're left defenseless to— and that allows all of these mechanisms converge at the exact same time and allow the cancer to just propagate and spread uncontrollably. In many of these cases, there will be a tumor that is kind of kept in check by the immune system.

Nic Hulscher ⋮ It wouldn't cause any damage for decades to come.

Marty Bent [15:37] Right.

Nic Hulscher [15:37] And then you introduce these multi-concurrent hit cancerous mechanisms with mRNA shots, and the time to clinical cancer compresses from decades to a month. And unfortunately, that's what's called a turbo cancer. And so we found that. And then lastly, we looked at the population data, official CDC Wonder Mortality Database data. And we found since 2021, since the mRNA shots rolled out, there's been over 150,000 more cancer deaths than normal among Americans. 150,000 excess cancer deaths, right? Since the mRNA injections rolled out, the graph keeps going up. So more and more people are dying from cancer than normal. And it continues to accelerate. And so it's not like it's going down back to normal. It appears these turbo cancers are here to stay.

Marty Bent [16:42] Yeah, it's shocking. And again, going back to what I was saying, the fact that we're speedrunning into this stuff without having certainty around it, it seems like we have certainty the other way, that this is something that we should probably pause and look into because it's severely hurting people. I think we mentioned it earlier, but the mRNA flu vaccine, again, Jessica Rose came on to discuss the study that was released that showed that it had a higher fatality rate than the normal flu vaccine, or higher adverse event rate than the normal flu vaccine. And then the trials, again, going back to the basics, we discussed this in March when you were first on.

Marty Bent ⋮ How do you run a good trial and have certainty? What placebos are you using? Are placebos even being used? And that's one thing I worry about because the flu vaccine is one of those that many people in my life have just basically accepted, oh, fall rolls around, I get a flu vaccine, protect myself. And the marketing around the mRNA flu vaccine is going to be very aggressive, and you're going to have people rushing to get this because they think it's better when the data seems to be saying that it's not.

Nic Hulscher [17:59] Yeah, it's, it's another disaster. So actually, we, we published that study, uh, that reanalysis of the clinical trial data for MFluciva, the mRNA flu shot by Moderna. And we found, um, it's very, very concerning because the FDA themselves and Moderna, they should have done this analysis. It's called a risk-benefit analysis. What they did in the FDA briefing document used to approve it was they didn't do any analysis. They just listed these numbers in giant tables, hoping nobody would connect the dots. And so we calculated what was called number needed to harm and numbers needed to vaccinate and compared what would be needed to prevent certain things.

Nic Hulscher ⋮ And so what we found was to prevent one flu hospitalization, According to their own data, 4,000 people have to suffer an adverse event. 300 people have to suffer a disabling grade 3 reaction that prevents daily activity, and 2 people have to die unexplained deaths. So it's a form of human sacrifice to administer Emfluciva. And so, and then we found, so unexplained deaths. 5 times more likely to die when getting the mRNA shot. And that was statistically significant, we found. And there was a 75% adverse event rate with the mRNA group, only 40% in the traditional flu shot. And there was 6 times more severe grade 3 reactions in the mRNA group compared to the traditional flu shot.

Nic Hulscher ⋮ And they approved it anyways. So they approved something that costs double the amount of deaths and thousands of injuries to prevent one flu hospitalization. They approved that. And that's absolutely madness. So we sent that study directly to Secretary Kennedy. And I can confirm he did receive it, and he stated they're taking it seriously. So hopefully, um, this disastrous, dangerous decision can be reversed immediately, because this is— it's so obvious. I mean, when the FDA's own data shows this stuff, action needs to be taken.

Marty Bent [20:34] It makes you wonder, how can they push it? I mean, you can see how they can push it through. They just sign papers and push it through. But Do these people have consciences? Is it all greed? Is it the— I mean, again, I think I said this in March when we first met, like, it forces you to think conspiratorially. Are they trying to depopulate part of the population? When you consider the data, and the data's out there, it's mind-boggling, almost like the country and the world, to a certain extent, is under a spell. They've conditioned people over time successfully enough to just trust the experts, that they're gonna provide them with good medicine or good vaccines at the end of the day.

Nic Hulscher [21:23] Yeah, yeah, it's, um, there definitely is a real conspiracy going on, at least with the fact that the FDA and regulatory agencies are still captured by the pharmaceutical industry, and they will just rubber stamp anything with mRNA on it. It doesn't matter how many deaths or people you have to sacrifice to do anything. It doesn't matter how much more likely you are to die from it. They will just rubber stamp it anyways. It doesn't matter if it doesn't work. They want to just rush everything in. They want mRNA for every disease you can think of, and they want to inject the entire population with synthetic genetic material.

Marty Bent [22:11] Is there any route you could see where mRNA makes sense, where it can be safe, where it's a good option and actually a technology that, that could help make people healthier or—

Nic Hulscher [22:27] No. And that's, that's the fatal mistake many people make, including tech people involved in technology and AI, because the recent push was for mRNA for cancer. Elon Musk has pushed this. He says it has promise for cancer, and many other individuals with no health expertise have stated the same. But a recent development has contradicted that quite significantly. BioNTech just had to terminate their mRNA cancer vaccine trial because it killed too many cancer patients compared to doing absolutely nothing. They had colon cancer patients, like hundreds of them. The mRNA group got up to 15 mRNA cancer boosters administered through IV, and the other group did nothing.

Nic Hulscher ⋮ And the group that did nothing died less and Fared much better. So now we have one of the first randomized tests of mRNA in cancer, and it was very dangerous and did not work. So, um, and that's because how it works is the same across all of the diseases. It goes to every single vital organ system in the lipid nanoparticles. It goes into your brain and into your heart. And for cancer, it instructs them not to make spike protein, but to make Mutated tumor proteins called neoantigens. So when you have your brain, your neurons, and your cardiomyocytes in your heart expressing mutated tumor proteins, that's going to target them for immune attack and result in brain damage and heart damage.

Nic Hulscher ⋮ And that's probably why more people died in the mRNA colon cancer vaccine group. So it's the same disastrous situation. for all of these diseases. And no, I do not see any circumstance by which this technology is safe for humans. It's already resulted in millions of deaths, hundreds of millions of injuries across the globe and disabilities. It needs to be retired.

Marty Bent [24:42] Sup, freaks? This rip was brought to you by our good friends at BitKey. Got the new BitKey here with the screen. We've been talking for 17 years, not your keys, not your coins. How do you make that as easy as possible? And that is what BitKey is bringing to the market. It's a 2-of-3 multisig self-custody setup where you have the hardware device, you have the mobile app, and a key and block servers in the cloud. There's no seed phrases. It's easy to set up. You can go from opening the package of the BitKey to having a wallet and receiving sats within 5 minutes. I've done it myself.

Marty Bent ⋮ It's very easy to set up. On top of this, BitKey has incredible recovery and inheritance features. So what happens to your stack when you die? The usual answer is seed phrase in safe and a prayer your family figures it out. BitKey has inheritance built in, a real designed handoff, no multisig coordinator spreadsheet, no lawyer holding your keys, no subscription. It's self-custody designed for decades, not just for setup day. It's part of the Bitcoin-only Blockstack, Cash App, Square, and BitKey, built to move Bitcoin forward as actual money. So download Bitcoin today and use my promo code TFTC10 to get 10% off the new BitKey. Freaks, look at me.

Marty Bent ⋮ I'm glowing. I've got like an angel's halo going around me. You know why that is? Is I feel good. I feel taken care of. I feel blessed, healthy, happy. And that is because I'm a CrowdHealth member. My family and I have been CrowdHealth members for 5 years now. Literally this month, 5 years ago, we joined CrowdHealth. We've had 2 babies, we've had multiple health events, and we're now going back to health insurance. CrowdHealth is crowdfunded healthcare. So you sign up for CrowdHealth, you pay a monthly fee, you help out with other people's bills, and it's significantly cheaper than health insurance. We were on COBRA as a family of 3 when I left my last job before I went full-time with CFTC, went on CrowdHealth.

Marty Bent ⋮ Now as a family of 5, we pay, I believe, $700 a month. It's significantly cheaper. They're going to negotiate prices lower for you. They've consistently negotiated healthcare prices as much as 50, 60, 80% in many cases. They help out with babies. If you have a pregnancy, you pay the first $3,000 and the crowd covers the rest. If you have a regular health event, you pay $500 and the crowd pays the rest. com, sign up today, use the code TFTC, opt out of health insurance. I'm uninsured, baby, and I love it. com and you'll get $99 a month for the first 3 months that you're on.

Marty Bent ⋮ the CrowdHealth platform in the community. Bitcoiners, you found sovereign money. Now find sovereign health and sovereign healthcare. Well, that's one of the shocking, maybe not shocking, but harrowing things, particularly COVID mRNA vaccines. Obviously, a large subset of the population went and got those to get back to work. Now fast forward to 2026, again, with the mRNA flu vaccine being pushed, unless Secretary Kennedy steps in and prevents it from hitting the market, it seems like that is going to be marketed very heavily, and there will be a material adoption rate of that particular vaccine. And then it just makes you naturally question, like, how do those 2 different mRNA vaccines interact with each other?

Marty Bent ⋮ Do we have any data around that, and could it exacerbate things?

Nic Hulscher [27:42] Yeah, exactly. And that's another thing, this compound mRNA vaccination, they never They never study the interactions now between all these. So you're right, for the people they're telling to get the mRNA flu shot, they're going to tell them to get the mRNA COVID booster at the same time. And these are what are called high-risk hosts, people who are already exposed to multiple mRNA boosters, and then injecting them with a new type of mRNA booster, and 2 of them at the same time, they don't know how that's going to interact. And some elderly, They'll be told to get the RSV mRNA booster shot, the flu mRNA booster shot, and the COVID mRNA booster shot at the same time with zero data showing that that's safe.

Nic Hulscher ⋮ It's going to be very dangerous. But again, it goes back to show they don't care if there's no data for safety on this. They haven't cared for the past 6 years. It's a rubber stamping process and it's cost An untold number of lives, and it's destroyed far too many families. It needs to be stopped. It needs to be stopped immediately.

Marty Bent [28:55] Do you have any confidence that it will be stopped?

Nic Hulscher [28:58] Unfortunately, I have very low confidence. We're trying everything we can to try and stop it. You know, like, we're sending these studies as quickly as possible. We're conducting these studies as quickly as possible and sending it To HHS and FDA and NIH officials, but unfortunately, it seems many of them don't care. And so, while we are trying to help stop it, I don't have a high level of confidence that they will. But you know, sitting back and doing nothing would be even worse. So we're going to continue to try and expose this disaster, and we're not going to stop despite the fact. That people are demoralized and they don't want to hear about it anymore, that's irrelevant, right?

Nic Hulscher ⋮ If we stop and do nothing, then we're for sure screwed, right? So we need to do something. And I would put it at— for the mRNA flu shot, at least, there's probably a less than 5% chance that they withdraw it. But we'll see. That paper we did will be in a peer-reviewed journal very soon, and that will give it more firepower, but we'll have to wait and see.

Marty Bent [30:17] Yeah, again, it's hard, hard to discern whether these pushes are seeped in nefarious— nefariousness or greed or a combination of two. I would not be shocked if it's a combination of the two, but I think for certain greed is at the core of a lot of what's going on here. There's a lot of money In this stuff. And I think another thing that you've highlighted recently is the fact you've done research on alternative cancer treatments. And some people are going to be pushed towards mRNA. The big pharma company is going to make a lot of money from that. But in a recent study, you found that 84% of cancer patients taking ivermectin and bendazole declared complete remission, tumor shrinkage, and halted cancer growth after 6 months.

Marty Bent ⋮ So this— This combination of antiparasitic medicines to treat cancer has been taboo. I've heard about this for probably 3 or 4 years now, and there'll be plenty of people who hop into the comments. Somebody says, hey, I took ivermectin and mebendazole and cured my cancer, and they say you're a quack, you're crazy. Based off of your study, how much confidence do you have that this is a Legitimate cancer treatment?

Nic Hulscher [31:38] I have a very high level of confidence. And we have to remember the clinical benefit signal of 84% declaring their cancers either regressed, disappeared, or stayed the same. That's an extremely large clinical benefit signal that's not seen with chemo and these other drugs, not even close. And so Our study was what's called a real-world study where it's like people undergoing already— some of them were doing chemo, some of them were doing radiation, some had surgery, some were taking other supplements. So it's what you would see in a real-world cohort of cancer patients, right? So it's applicable to not just taking ivermectin, but doing other things as well.

Nic Hulscher ⋮ And so what our study really shows is At least adding on these antiparasitics to whatever regimen you are on was linked to that major, major benefit. And so what needs to happen is what's called randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trials to isolate the benefit of ivermectin. But again, that costs tens of millions of dollars and there's nobody funding that. Florida is funding it finally, but we're not going to get results for a couple of years now. And so we have to start making decisions based on these preliminary data that we have now. And it's very, very promising. And chemotherapy is very dangerous. It's the only form of treatment really that's administered And its clinical benefit rate is not 80%.

Nic Hulscher ⋮ It's down to 20%, depending on the cancer. It can be 40% in some cancers. And it destroys the entire body, and your hair falls out, and you feel like you're going to die. And in some circumstances, it accelerates the time to death. And so we got to get away from this dinosaur medicine. And that does not mean going to messenger RNA. And so that's what they're trying to do. They're trying to say it's an upgrade to go from chemo to mRNA and other patented biologics. And again, most of the time, they're only going to be studying and pouring large sums of money into patentable drugs, right?

Nic Hulscher ⋮ Drugs that can be owned by a company and can be sold for hundreds of thousands of dollars. And so that's why we don't see studies on ivermectin and mebendazole. But we have one, another one planned. Instead of 200 cancer patients, we plan to be looking at over 1,000, and we're going to start to hone in on specific cancer types.

Marty Bent [34:32] All right, freaks, you know I don't take sponsor money from products I wouldn't use myself, so listen up. The Aven Bitcoin Visa card is one of the most interesting things I've seen in the Bitcoin lending space in a long time. Here's the deal: you can get a line of credit up to $1 million backed by your Bitcoin without selling a single sat. No games, no annual fees, no minimum draws, and your Bitcoin is custodied by BitGo, one of the most trusted names in digital asset security. Aven never lends it out. There's no rehypothecation. You stay in control. You can lock in a fixed rate for up to 10 years.

Marty Bent ⋮ 10 years. That's 10 times longer than most lenders out there, or go interest only for up to 5 years. 99% APR. For a product that lets you keep your stack and still access liquidity, it's hard to beat. On top of this, That's what you also get, 2% unlimited cash back every time you use the card. Spend fiat, keep your Bitcoin. That's the whole game. If you've been stacking for years and you need liquidity without triggering a taxable event, this is worth a serious look. com/bitcoin. com/bitcoin. Check it out. Sup freaks? This rip was brought to you by our good friends at Salt of the Earth.

Marty Bent ⋮ It's so delicious. This is my pink lemonade electrolyte mix. It's pink Himalayan salt. There's no sugar. It's way better than LMNT, Liquid IV. I went through a, a big electrolyte kick testing them all out, and I landed on this, settled on this. Been drinking it pretty consistently every day for 2 years now. It is my favorite. This is the pink lemonade. They have orange here. As you can see, this one's ripped. I had this on the train ride back from New York last night. I'm always stocked up with these things. They also have creatine packets. Very convenient, particularly if you're traveling and you like to work out.

Marty Bent ⋮ You like get those brain juices flowing. They have these creatine packets as well. They're about to launch a bunch more flavors: lemon lime, watermelon, and and a few others as well. So go check it out. Go to drink sote d r i n k s o t e dot com. Use the code TFTC for 15% off. Seriously, game changer in our house. My wife drinks it, I drink it, our boys drink it. Stay hydrated. It's a beautiful thing. What is your thesis on how the antiparasitic medicines help with the cancer? What is it that ivermectin and mebendazole are doing?

Nic Hulscher [36:55] Yeah. So, there's actually across hundreds of preclinical studies now, there's over 12 distinct anti-cancer mechanisms across over 12 cancer types. So in the laboratory, when they expose human cancer cells to ivermectin or membenzol or fenbendazole, it kills those cancer cells with 12 mechanisms. The main mechanism is it literally induces apoptosis or programmed cell death specifically in cancer cells, not healthy cells. It cuts off angiogenesis, which is the blood supply to tumors. So it literally stops that tumor spread by cutting off the blood supply. It inhibits the glycolysis in these tumors so they cannot take up sugar to help grow anymore. It disrupts microtubules in cancer cells, which is a cell scaffolding essential for cancer cell division.

Nic Hulscher ⋮ Um, and bendazole does that quite potently. And it also targets cancer stem cells, which are the source of a lot of these cancers that literally spawn from these cancer stem cells that chemo doesn't get rid of. Ivermectin targets those quite potently. And it interferes with cancer cell signaling, which is how cancer cells kind of communicate to each other and to themselves to help grow. And so you cut off that communication chain and the tumors are going to end up shrinking and the cancer cells dying.

Marty Bent [38:34] How long have people been experimenting with this for cancer treatment?

Nic Hulscher [38:38] It's really only started to blow up, at least preclinically, over the past 15, 20 years. Before that, there was only a few little isolated studies here and there. In fact, the CIA had a document in the 1950s. They had a Soviet study that found antiparasitics have anti-tumor activity in the 1950s, but they classified it. They classified it for over 60 years, and that wasn't declassified till 2010. And so that significantly set back this research for over half a century. So that was very concerning. So now we're picking up the pieces and we are finding that this is— that antiparasitics are a very promising, very promising cancer treatment.

Marty Bent [39:34] I mean, again, going back to being forced to be conspiratorial, like why classify information that would be beneficial for the public to know as it pertains to cancer, which especially When you consider how terrible cancer is for individuals and their families going through it. I mean, cancer sucks is a meme for a reason. It is one of the worst ways to go. It can be a slow, painful, and monotonous death. It can be very quick with turbo cancers, but either way, it's not a dignified way to go out. And you would think that if the government had any inkling That there was a way to cure people of their cancer in a better way, in a less harmful way compared to chemotherapy, they would be all over that.

Nic Hulscher [40:20] Exactly. So the main problem here now is the conventional oncologists, you know, patients will bring up to their conventional oncologists that they want to take ivermectin or mebendazole and add it on to their treatment they're already doing, not replace it, Add it on. And their oncologists are telling them, no, it's dangerous, it doesn't work. And so that's the main barrier here. And so they're going to be forced to obtain the ivermectin from either India or other sources in the US from a different doctor. So cancer patients— or cancer doctors are firing their cancer patients because they want to take an alternative treatment. So that's a major issue that's currently ongoing.

Nic Hulscher ⋮ And that's why doing the research is so important. We have to start showing these oncologists that, hold on, there is some benefit. And unfortunately, many of them don't even read any of the literature because they don't even understand that there's 12 anti-cancer mechanisms across hundreds of studies because they don't bother to look. They just assume, oh, anti-parasitic, that can't possibly be used for cancer. And so they're not using critical thinking skills. So, you know, this is— this needs to be navigated. And then also the cancer cartel or the chemo cartel heavily is heavily attacking this anti-parasitic trend. They send out fact-checking organizations and mainstream news sites that receive money from cancer biologic developers.

Nic Hulscher ⋮ to smear it and say it's dangerous and doesn't work. So, you know, again, we're up against another large behemoth. It's not just the vaccine cartel, it's the chemo cartel.

Marty Bent [42:10] Well, is there any efficacy to the it's dangerous? Because from what I understand, diving into ivermectin specifically— I don't know much about membenzol— but you have people taking ivermectin daily as an anti-malaria drug in countries throughout Africa. And from what I understand, when I was diving deep into it during the COVID times, like, it is pretty— I wouldn't say benign, but it's— you're not at high risk if you're taking a low dose of ivermectin every day. And like, how could they claim something like that is dangerous? It's been described as a miracle drug.

Nic Hulscher [42:46] Exactly. It's safer than Tylenol. It's safer than Tylenol. It's less toxic to the liver than one of the most commonly used painkillers. And so it's safer than ibuprofen. It's a very safe compound. Now, obviously, you can't take 50 pills. You'll probably die if you overdose on it. It's not inert. But comparatively to every single other drug people take on a daily basis, it is safer. And so particularly if you have cancer or a severe illness, it's not going to be very risky. It's not. The only time it could be risky is if you have liver failure already and you can't process it. Okay, then, okay, I would understand the concern.

Nic Hulscher ⋮ But other than that, very low adverse event profiles. In our study, there was no major adverse events. The main adverse events you'll see are gastrointestinal Upset, right? So you can get a stomachache or nausea if you take too high of a dose, and you can experience some dizziness. That is a side effect, not severe dizziness, but just a little bit. Again, if you are on a high dose, like 4 capsules a day, but it's not causing any severe harm in the body.

Marty Bent [44:15] What can people who are listening who agree, maybe not agree, but are listening to this, have listened to the first discussion we had earlier this year, and have listened to other conversations we've had with doctors who are on the same tip saying, hey, these things may be dangerous. There are safer ways to do this. There is a perverse incentive that enters the equation between big pharma, governments, and stakeholders who have an incentive to push this. On the public? What does any engaged, worried citizen need to be doing as this stuff is getting rolled out? And how can we turn the tides? And again, I've had dozens of conversations like this over the last 5 years, 6 years now.

Marty Bent ⋮ And it's always— I will always come back to it. How do we hold these people accountable? And what can we do to turn the tide in the other way? Does it need to be Hey, does there need to be a mass shift in public perception, um, and narrative around this? And if so, how do we begin to do that? And I think you're on the tip of the spear. I really appreciate what you do to get out there and try to educate people, getting on big shows, um, much bigger than this one, uh, coming on small shows like this and doing it as well. Um, but yeah, it's something that is still nagging.

Marty Bent ⋮ nagging me on almost a daily basis. Like, how can we shift public perception?

Nic Hulscher [45:44] Yeah, well, the easiest thing people can do studying at home is to just share this information, share these new studies with your friends and family, right? If everybody did that across the United States or across the world, people would simply just refuse these new mRNA shots. And, you know, they would be forced to not give them anymore. So that's the easiest thing you can do, is just at least warn your close family members, warn your friends, and show them the evidence. The second thing people can do is start your own podcast, start your own social media accounts, and share it online, which will reach a large— far larger number of people than, you know, just your friends and family.

Nic Hulscher ⋮ And just grow that and start sharing that. And so that's the easy— and then you can also contact, you know, your local representatives and just tell them your major concerns with what was just approved and provide them this evidence, provide them these studies. And so people, you know, sitting at home watching this podcast can make a difference. It doesn't matter how big the difference is. You can make at least a small difference that— and if enough people do that, It will contribute to the overall trajectory of where we're headed. And again, if we just sit back and do nothing and sit back and be demoralized, then we will lose.

Nic Hulscher ⋮ We will lose if we do that. And so what we're doing as researchers is we're trying to do these studies and get it to key individuals And that's our attempt at helping to stop this, as well as, again, spreading this information as far as we can. So there is hope. And I think we can get out of this, but only if people do, do what they should be doing and raising the alarm and not sitting back quietly. Yeah.

Marty Bent [47:54] Don't be afraid.

Nic Hulscher [47:55] Share it.

Marty Bent [47:56] Because I think of the elderly in my life who are picking up the remote, turning on mainstream media, getting the directions from the newscasters, like, oh, they have a new mRNA flu vaccine. And that is one thing I'll be doing is saying, hey, if you're going to go get the flu vaccine, I haven't gotten it since I was in high school. I don't recommend it. But you do what you do. At the very least, don't get this new mRNA vaccine. Just go with the old one. That's one thing. But it is crazy, the grip that the mainstream media and just the groupthink around Big Pharma has on some people's minds. You're quickly cast away as a quack for even trying to broach the subject in many, many cases. I've found personally that, uh, don't get, don't get too discouraged when you get, uh, cast as a, as a quack. There, there have been some successful conversions through very light touch, uh, nudging people towards the research and the data.

Nic Hulscher [49:03] Yeah, exactly. Yeah, you can't be afraid of what other people say about you, and you know, that's the main barrier to people speaking out. You know, they don't want to be labeled a conspiracy theorist or, you know, an anti-vaxxer or, you know, whatever. So what people have to do, you just have to block that out. You know, it's irrelevant. It doesn't matter because there's actually a larger proportion of people now that will actually not label you those things. And they want to hear this vital information. And those using derogatory terms like anti-vaxxer and conspiracy theorist You know, they're, they're on the losing end here, right? People don't trust them anymore. So really, it's completely irrelevant what they say now. As long as we follow the actual data and we report what the actual data is showing, you just got to tell the truth. And if you do that, you know, you will be in a much better situation and so will the world. Yeah.

Marty Bent [50:10] Last thing I want to end it on, selfish topic, because I saw this on your feed and was like, oh, this is interesting. And it's also focusing on positive things, cheap solutions. And it has nothing to do with the flu or cancer, but you had a new study that found that magnesium made participants' brains perform 7.5 years younger in just 6 weeks. Placebo-controlled trial found 2 grams Magnesium L-threonate daily produced significant improvements in overall cognition, working memory, reaction time. I don't use magnesium L-threonate, but I do use magnesium L-arginine every night. And magnesium, for me personally, over the last, I think, 3 years, my wife and I have been religiously rubbing magnesium L-arginine on the bottom of our feet. And it helps me sleep better. I wake up energized. What is it about magnesium that is producing these, these positive results? And what— how should we view the different types of magnesium that are out there?

Nic Hulscher [51:16] Yeah, magnesium is critical for thousands of cellular and enzymatic processes in the human body, specifically in the brain, right? Your brain needs magnesium. The neurons need magnesium. to carry out their functions adequately. And so when you're deficient in magnesium, like most people are now because foods are, are void of it now, the soil's void of it, the tap water doesn't have it, and the bottled— some bottled waters don't have it, um, you know, you're going to be deficient. You drink a large amount of coffee, you're going to be peeing all that out, and, um, and then you'll be left with no adequate magnesium stores. So What that specific study showed was it was a double-blind randomized placebo-controlled trial, literally the strongest type of study you could do.

Nic Hulscher ⋮ And they gave half the participants magnesium L-threonate, which is magnesium bounded to a certain amino acid. And that particular form of magnesium readily passes the blood-brain barrier. So it rapidly increases neuronal magnesium stores. And so reflective of increasing brain magnesium is increased cognitive capacity, reaction time, cognitive processing. 5 years younger. Right. So that— it's a very potent neurological compound mineral, and it is required for it. So that's why we see these major effect sizes. Now, other forms of magnesium are also very helpful, but many of them will serve different purposes. Like, say, for example, magnesium citrate. This one's readily absorbed into muscle tissue. And, but it's not easily absorbed in the brain.

Nic Hulscher ⋮ Magnesium glycinate, this one is very similar to magnesium L-threonate. It also gets into the neurological system quite well and helps with sleep. And you mentioned your version. I'm not an expert in, in the arginine version, but I would suspect those that are bounded to an amino acid like that will be more easily uptaken into the central nervous system. And help with those, with those cognitive capabilities.

Marty Bent [54:00] And these are relatively cheap as well.

Nic Hulscher [54:03] Yeah. Oh, they're very cheap. Now, L-threonate is kind of expensive. L-threonate is kind of expensive. In fact, it might be the most expensive one. But glycinate is very cheap and it does very similar things. The one that doesn't do much for this is magnesium oxide. This one, basically, that's if you need to, you know, you need a laxative, you'll take large amounts of magnesium oxide. It doesn't absorb very well. Yeah.

Marty Bent [54:32] No, it's the L-arginine that my wife and I have been taking. Again, sleep like a rock. I get 8 hours of sleep straight, no disturbance. Feel refreshed when I wake up. I definitely, I think it helps the brain. But no, I think it's another topic that sort of attacks what we were discussing for most of the conversation from the other end, which is preventative. Like, make sure your body has enough nutrients, make sure you're working out, and get to a physical state where you don't have to even think about having to take an mRNA cancer vaccine or cancer treatment.

Nic Hulscher [55:12] Exactly.

Marty Bent [55:16] And notice that you're deficient in a lot of these, uh, a lot of these minerals, magnesium being one of the most important.

Nic Hulscher [55:22] Yeah, exactly. Just classic lifestyle things are way more effective than taking a gene therapy. And that's again what people need to understand, like just, just getting sunlight and adequate vitamin D. I mean, just doing that's going to decrease your risk of cancer death, reduce your risk of all cause death, reduce your risk of diabetes, reduce your risk of internal cancers, and basically improve your mood at the same time. And so, you know, and improve your immune system and fight off against the very diseases you're taking the mRNA injections for and does it more effectively. So yeah, we, you know, just these basic things is really all we need to do.

Marty Bent [56:16] Yeah. Think about it. Nick, we're headed into Labor Day weekend. I know it's Friday. I hope you enjoy it. Get some rest. I know you've been on the front lines vigorously defending the rights of individuals and trying to get good information out there. Not trying, successfully getting good information out there. And I thank you for joining us to update our audience because I think, again, extremely important. I'm not giving this up. This will be a beat that I cover until we get accountability and more sensible medical policy in this country.

Nic Hulscher [56:49] Well, thanks for having me.

Marty Bent [56:51] All right. Peace and love, freaks.

Nic Hulscher [56:54] Okay.

Marty Bent [56:54] Thank you for listening to this episode of TFTC. If you've made it this far, I imagine you got some value out of the episode. If so, please share it far and wide with your friends and family. We're looking to get the word out there. Also, wherever you're listening, whether that's YouTube, Apple, Spotify, make sure you like and subscribe to the show. And if you can leave a rating on the podcasting platforms, that goes a long way. Last but not least, if you want to get these episodes a day early and ad-free, make sure you download the Fountain podcasting app. You can go to fountain.fm to find that. $5 a month gets you every episode a day early, ad-free. Helps the show, gives you incredible value. So please consider subscribing via Fountain as well. Thank you for your time, and until next time. Okay.