Karthe Goo to Londa est Hello and welcome to Everything's Political. I'm your host,
Taya Shoemake. You can also find us online at Everything's Political dot substack
dot com. Shout out to Magicman Joe Strecker, the John Dickinson of podcast
producers, born on this day in seventeen thirty two. He is indeed one
of our favorite revolutionaries. Of course, the famous penmen of letters from a
farmer in Pennsylvania to both the Crown and Parliament to try to stave the secession
from Mother England during the War for Independence. And of course what I loved
about him was that he first of all, his eloquence and grasp of the
English language was wonderful. His prose was off the charts. Also, he
understood that they had exhausted every measure to get the Crown to understand their plight,
or to even listen to their plight, and they just kept getting the
big one finger salute. Now, he did not sign the Declaration of Independence,
he did not necessarily want to secede again, and he didn't really want
to go to war. Who does. But when that decision was made,
he understood that they did everything in their power, and he was the first
to arm those around him, and so I do appreciate that from John Dickinson
born on this day in seventeen thirty two. Okay, joining us today is
one of our favorite guests. He is one of the world's most renowned experts
and pulmonary and critical care. He is also the president and chief medical Officer
of the Frontline COVID nineteen Critical Care Alliance and the author of the War on
Ivermectin. He is doctor Pierre Corey. Welcome back, doctor Pierre Corey.
Thanks for being with us today. Definitely a pleasure, Doctor Corey. Wow,
I'm sure you have lit a firestorm with your series multi part series that
you've released on substack about the topic of shedding with regard to the mRNA shots.
Just to start off a basic lesson, what is shedding? Yeah,
So that's a good question because shedding is actually a term that's been used for
decades in context of viral shedding. So after vaccines, people are vaccinated,
they get a virus, they can still shed virus. But that's not what
we're talking about here. This is a different definition of shedding, and I've
actually seen people kind of confuse that to it actually made it hard to do
the research because when you use the search term shedding, you're deluged with all
these papers about viral shedding. So this is very specific to the shedding of
gene therapy products, right, because that's what these vaccines are. And sort
of my post kind of begins with kind of two findings. One is that
the mr Anda vaccines, to anyone paying attention, I'm sure you know this
right, meets the definition of a gene based therapy product. So once you
understand it is that. And then you come across this document from the FDI
from twenty fifteen essentially recommending that not only animal shedding studies be done, but
human hetting studies be done for any gene therapy product. And just like many
other types of studies, shedding studies were not done. Now, actually,
let me correct that there was a FOYA document where there was a mention of
a rat study where they did they looked at shedding and rats. We don't
know the results of that, and that hasn't been publicized. So effectively,
no shedding studies were done. So what we hear from the Twitter verse and
all those experts with a lot of letters after their name is only live attenuated
viruses can shed if they are in a vex, if they're used in a
vaccine, and that really doesn't get to the heart of it in my opinion,
because if you think past that, you're still injecting your body with something
that is going to produce an antigen that your body will want to expel.
Is that an accurate assessment. I mean, this is a gense therapy where
we're injecting and then this is why it meets the definition of a gene based
theory is that you're injecting mr and A, which then gets transcribed into a
protein, so your body starts producing this foreign protein. Right, So that
is one of the products of these vaccines, But there are others. Right
there's actual vaccine itself, which is mRNA enclosed in a lipid nanoparticle, and
we kind of call them lipid nanoparticles when they're synthetic like in the vaccines,
but they're the natural counterparts a something that circulates in our body, which we
use the term exosomes, so they're kind of interchangeable. I kind of use
one to refer to the synthetic version of a nanoparticle and the exosome is sort
of the endogenous biological version of a nanoparticle, and that's kind of the third
key concept that people have to understand is that although we categorize them as a
gene therapy product, I think it's much more instructive to understand them as part
of nanoparticle technology. This is only one form of a nanoparticle nectop technology,
and that's where you really start learning about shedding. When you start learning about
this nanoparticle industry, how long it's been going on, how many products using
nanoparticles are actually available to consumers right now, this is only one of them.
One of the review papers cited that there's one eight and fourteen nanoparticle products
available to consumers across multiple fields. And so when you understand the then you
have to understand a little bit of something about the nanoparticle, which is that
these nanoparticles are just shocking to me because they actually can cross almost any physiologic
barer. So they can cross the skin, they can go get in through
the eyes, they can be inhaled, I mean, they have many different
ways of entering the body. And then you also have to match that with
the fact that we know contrary to the claims that you know these things would
stay in your arm. They can't stay in your arm. They literally can
cross and distribute anywhere in the body. We've known that from animal studies,
we know that from autopsy studies that you see spike and lipid nanoparticles distributed everywhere.
And so that's the thing about nanoparticle technology that we have to remember.
And one of the things that shocked me is that in reading like these numerous
kind of review papers, each paper has a sentence in it, oftentimes in
the abstract conclusion. More studies on the safety and toxicity of these nanoparticles need
to be done, and they weren't done. They're not done, and in
particular with this product, we did not do shedding studies that the FDA recommended.
Well, I think this topic has sparked such a firestorm. People have
so many questions that yield other questions, right, which just demand the studies
to your point that need to be conducted. Originally, I mean, I
had an idea that vaccines shed and I also knew I read a paper a
long time ago about the FDA or some pharmaceutical company that was trying to create
a vaccine to mediate the hunt of virus that was going around in mice,
and so they were trying to find a self spreading vaccine. So of course
when I hear shedding. When I heard that regarding the COVID shot, that's
the first thing that popped into my mind. But initially I didn't dismiss it.
I was always aware of it. But I thought to myself, if
this shot was so precarious, right, you had to freeze it to death,
You had to make sure you handled it a certain way in order for
it to be effective to get into the body, et cetera, encapsulate it
in that fat or LNP. It made sense that the spike would come out
right, because that's what's produced. But as far as the mRNA, as
far as the LNP, I thought, well, maybe that's a little difficult.
But again, no one's going to know. And it wasn't until I
had my own event with the shedding occurrence that I went, Okay, well
maybe this is maybe there's more to this. Well there is more. So
although they didn't do shedding studies, we have a few studies that are really
concerning right. So there's one study where they looked for spike antibodies and the
children of vaccinated parents, right, who had not had COVID, had not
been vaccinated, and they found IgG antibodies and the children. And in that
paper, the authors they hypothesized that it was somehow the antibodies that were being
transmitted, and that this is in breast milk infants. Rightly, we'll get
to that in a second. This is the children in the household of newly
vaccinated parents. So it leaves the question how come the children developed antibodies to
the spike protein, right, So you have two choices. The authors positive
that it's the antibodies that are somehow transmitted to the children. I haven't heard
of that. I'm not naturally immune to anything just because my parents had it
right, their antibodies, I mean, aside from breast milk transmission and transplacental
transmission of animis I'm talking about before COVID. I'm not aware of immunity being
passed from parent to child. So these authors literally positive that was the case.
My after you read the entire series and all of the evidence, I'm
certain that what gave those kids the ability to make antibodies is either the transmission
of lipid nanoparticle closed m RNA to the child or spike protein to the child.
But the children got something that had to make their own antibodies. And
so we know just in the household that you can transfer some part of the
product. Again, is it the spike antibody or the mr and that we
don't know. We don't have studies for that, but clearly there's components or
products of these mr E vaccines that now cause immunity in those in your environment.
So that's one piece of data the most alarming. And this is why
I think it's actually the spike protein that's being transmitted to those children, is
because the spike protein. And I would call myself an expert, an evolving
expert in the treatment of spike protein and neuse diseases because that's what I do
in my private practice. That's all we do, is we treat long VACS
and long covid, and the spike protein is clearly the pathogen for all of
the symptoms because the two syndromes, long VACS and long covid are essentially identical.
One right, long covid, it's just a spike protein and the virus,
and the other one it's just a spike protein and so those are the
similarities. Right, There's no lipid nanoparticles in long COVID. So the reason
why I think it's a spike protein is there's another study which and this was
shocking to me, they looked at it was one of the kind of the
first studies that really kind of blew up in like our world. I'm going
to call it the COVID dissident world, right, where we're looking at all
the things that they're suppressing and distorting. Right. And a paper by two
very high level researchers hit a preprint over maybe a year and a half ago
looking at correlations between excess mortality and vaccination rates across the US and Europe,
and they found repeated strong correlations. As vaccination rates with the mr ANDA went
up, so did excess mortality. Very good reasons for that, we know.
But and I didn't read this or pick up on this on the time,
but I saw it in somebody else was writing about this and pointed this
out. In that paper, they found that the correlation between vaccination rates of
adults actually correlated with rises and excess mortality of unvaccinated children. And they found
that like out of thirty two correlations they did twenty nine of them. They
were strongly correlated. So literally, as you ramp up these adult vaccination campaigns
at a time when the children were not being vaccinated, remember that period before
we started giving it to kids, and they saw those type correlations, and
those correlations held up to about eighteen weeks after the vaccine. And so why
would kids suddenly start dying as adults were starting to get aggressively vaccinated. And
that's probably the most troubling aspect of of what was being transmitted or shed,
And so it truly is shocking to me. It's shocking, and I read
I think it was part seven or part nine with all of the anecdotal evidence.
And we spoke last time about at some point the anecdotal evidence becomes the
basis for the scientific studies, right, there's not even a question. I
mean, read those I'd like to call them case reports, although they're not
obviously formal, peer reviewed published case reports because and without getting to cynical too
early, I mean, I think it would be nearly impossible to publish one
for a few reasons. One would be political. We know that the you
know, we're dealing with mass censorship of anything adverse about these vaccines, especially
something as troubling as this, because this has impacts potential inmocs. I'm literally
all of humanity. That's a very strange sentence to have to say, but
it's true, it actually impacts me. I have concerns now I after learning
what I learned about shedding. That would be one reason why you couldn't publish
it. The other one is really for a case report, you have to
have some sort of other supporting evidence that it was due to transmission of a
product. So for instance, you'd want to have like, you know,
no spike antibodies before the event, and then spike annibodies after without any you
know, any typical viral symptoms, or you'd have to find spike in the
blood, like you would need some yological or blood evidence to support your assertion.
So you know, they haven't published any of these case reports. But
if you see, the anecdotes are beyond compelling. They're convincing, and a
number of them were written by physicians and even sort of microbiology experts, Like
these were scientific folks, and you could see the way that they wrote Their
kind of anecdotes were very scientific, very kind of objective, they ruled out
confounders, and then I just want to bring up, like, how kind
of I got more and more interested in this is that in our practice,
we started to see a co of our patients who were reporting like we were
getting them better with our therapies. They were enjoying a new functional status and
mitigation of their symptoms. And then they were querying us like, you know,
I keep feeling good and then something goes backward. So they kept relapsing,
getting new symptoms, and they themselves started to see a pattern developed whereas
it was occurring after close exposures to the recently vaccinated. Then my first report
that I treated was March of twenty twenty one. And the most common of
these shetting phenomenon far and away is menstrual irregularities in women, and that exploded
on social media in early twenty twenty one, right everyone fact checked it to
death, dismissed it. The Facebook groups got shut down, and so that's
number one, and we saw, you know, a lot of the case
reports are on that, but other symptoms can happen as well, and some
of them are striking for severe illness that doesn't relate to the mental admalities,
but probably a good time where I'm going to again mention. And I feel
always uncomfortable doing this because I know of a group. They have a paper,
they did a study. It's a prospective study. It's not published yet,
so I'm trying to be respectful to their research. I don't really want
to talk about the results specifically, but and I also don't know exactly their
methods because they're just about to be published. They're finishing purity. But they
took I think something around one hundred unvaccinated women had them have close exposures to
vaccinated women, and they measured as an outcome changes in menstrual cycles or new
abnormal mencies, and from what I've heard, it's profoundly positive. We haven't
seen the study yet, but there is at least now a clinical study showing
that the shedding phenomenon is real and tied to symptoms. Again, i'd have
to look at the methods of exposure and duration, And also I'm really interested
to see because this is another question that comes up, like the women that
they were exposed to who were vaccinated, how long after the vaccine were they
exposed, Because that's the big question that comes up, Oh, doctor Corey,
how long do I have to worry about someone vaccine? And if you
read through all of the clinical reports that are on my sub stack, the
numbers vary, I mean, or the people reporting these things. Some feel
like the sensitivity to shedding phenomenon is closer to the vaccine, like around two
weeks. Others report being able to know if someone's vaccinated and feeling symptoms from
them at any time after the vaccine. And so those are the concerning ones
especially, And it sounds like you've read the full thing. If you remember
the very detailed report from this woman in Australia who seemed extremely sensitive to shedding,
she states symphatically that they can shed all the time, at any time
after the vaccine, and that let me let me finish this answer with one
other other kind of point is that you know the question of who is subject
to falling ill from shedding, it's clearly not all of us, right,
So it's not me. I mean, I travel everywhere, having traveling two
years, I meet hundreds, if not that of people every month or six
months. I've never had any symptom that I could attribute to being exposed to
the spike protein. But I'm also I know myself, I'm very physiologically and
sensitive to like environmental elligens, pollutants, you know, even intoxicants like you
know I, or pharmaceuticals I never have any problem with. But you know,
when I've in my career, I kind of always put my patients in
kind of three categories, you know, one that are physiologically kind of resistant
to therapies, ever's affected therapists. Then there's the great middle. But then
there's this cohort that you have to be very gentle with, Like if you're
going to use pharmaceuticals, you have to use low doses, you have to
go slow. And I think it's that cohort of patients that's particularly sensitive.
And when I say sensitive, I mean sensitive to developing symptoms related to exposure,
because there's another category of things that I wear about. It's like,
okay, so I'm not sensitive. I don't get clinically ill being around a
vaccinated person, But what is being shed on me? What is being absorbed
into me? And what are the short and long time or implications beyond that
illness? And so I mean the huge questions around here which no one wants
to ask. Right when I say no, nobody in the authority wants to
ask. I mean this, this, this constant suppression of anything adverse around
the vaccines, you know, continues a pace. You know, it's interesting
a lot of our listeners have had similar issues, mostly women. I mean,
we could probably break that sensitive group down to men and women, right,
and mostly women. I think I think it's mostly if especially if you
look at the anecdotes, it's yes, it's the majority of women that we
have exceptions to that, but really absolutely the majority of women. This could
be a correlation, obviously, but when I started hearing people tell me about
their experiences which were similar to mine, I thought, well, okay,
we know that in the adverse effects, we're having lots of menstrual issues with
women, so the shedding issue, that would make sense, right, that
that would be correlated. And what was a little scary to me was if
the liquid nanoparticles settle in the ovaries of a vaccinated person, that kind of
busted my theory that it was only spike. And that's really terrifying. So
you know, you've got a woman that I think one woman on that sub
stack, doctor Corey, she went through menopause. She was finished in nineteen
ninety eight. Yep, and was a round a vaccinated person and started postmenopausal
bleeding. And I thought, that's terrifying because as you know, that postmenopausal
bleeding is either nothing or it's cancer. Cancer. Yeah, and there's actually
there was if I recall, there's more than one that reported you know,
resumption bleeding after being in menopause. But yes, you're right, there was
one woman who had menopause many years ago. But yeah, no, and
in the menstrual abnormalities that's kind of like the signal. But you know,
to your point, right, So if you worry about what shutting can cause,
I mean, it's very plain to say what ever the vaccine side effects
are in the vaccinated, that's what would be possible if shedding of those components
were possible. And so although most of the reports were menstrual, there is
quite a few. There's vertigo, headache, there's even some chronic fatigue syndrome,
and a couple couple of them became chronically ill after exposure. So it's
really any of the above. And so and we know that the list of
vaccine side effects and risks that it causes, you know, from cancer to
everything is increased. You know, I worry about me. And here's the
thing, right, I've been saying this recently, this vaccine story, it
can't get worse, Just when you think it can't get worse, Like we
just came off of like six weeks of a lot of us really calling out
and paying attention to the universal contamination of the vials with DNA plasmids right,
with strange sequences in them, really worrisome sequences that promote not only cancer or
potential to promote cancer, but as well as also enhance integration into the genome,
right, the human genome. We're waiting on studies to see in the
vaccinated whether any of these sequence are in the cells of the humans. So
we still have lots of questions. But as if that wasn't worrying enough,
And during that I'm also doing my research on shedding. Then I find that,
like, not only shedding is real, that the science is real.
The regulators knew it. They were warning that you have to do studies.
We have too much clinical phenomenon. We have these studies which, like I
said, the one that's about to come out, which actually literally shows symptoms
developing after exposure. We have all the anecdotes, we have the antibody study,
and then that really worriesome correlation study of excess mortality and unvaccinated children,
and so it's the totality evidence is overwhelming. And so let's describe where we
are now. So we're living on a planet in the wake of a global
gene therapy vaccination campaign which were contaminated and the products as well as the components
themselves can be closed and either natural exosomes or synthetical lipid nanopart because despite route
in our body, it can be enclosed in an exosome. And here's the
thing about exoome is that they can be exhaled. They can be inhaled rapidly
absorbed. And so I'm worrying for myself, like what's going on. I
live in a world where everyone who got vaccinated now can have that transmitted,
right, And when you talked about self spreading vaccines, I mean that stuff
is real, right, Like I gave the example of the children with the
antibodies. I mean that's an example of the self spreading vaccines. And so
I think the amounts are small, but I don't know. I don't caterial,
so we don't know, no one's done a really clear quantitative study and
so, and it's such an easy study to do. Any lab could do
it. It's frustrating. I think the to your point about the spike,
you know, we talk about natural immunity, we talk about you know,
we say here often the best defense is a great offense, because what do
you do. We get your body healthy. You cut down on inflammation,
You try to eat as clean as possible, maybe do a fast or two
a month, you know, whatever you can do to help that cell respiration
and autophagy. Would you say it's accurate that the spike to your point about
being so pathogenic. Yep, the spike from the virus and the spike that's
produced by the mRNA, and I think they're molected. I think they're different,
but they both do the same thing. They wreak havoc, They find
or exploit current weaknesses. Is that accurate? Both spike proteins, even though
you're right, they're different. Right, because the viral spike protein has undergone
numerous mutations and variants, it's still a spike protein. It's still touches the
ACE receptor, and it's still capable of triggering a dozen pathogenic processes. So
yeah, they're both pathogenic, but they are different, somewhat different as far
as the protein surface, but they cause just a horrific amount of illness.
And you know, there's this incredible review paper published about a month ago now
by pariot Ol which literally introduces a term into the literature called spikeopathy. And
that paper is it's immense paper. I think it has like two hundred and
seventy references, but it goes through all of the in vitro data of what
the spike causes, you know, all the receptors that are triggers, all
the path of physical logic, you know, the impacts on the immune system,
the impacts on clotting, the impacts on vessel walls and endo, theliitis
and in the heart muscle, and it's it truly is astonishing that we're literally
vaccinating with a toxic pathogen. Period the science has been clear that is a
toxic pathogen, the spiked And not only that, we're not just injecting the
spike in a small amount, we're injecting the code to make spike without a
shutoff button, right. And that's the other thing I know is and that's
probably the most damning is the autopsy series from like Burkhart at Ol, from
the German pathologist who unfortunately is now deceased. But you know, he started
doing second opinion autopsies on patients whose families were convinced that the vaccine was the
cause of their death. And he did something that no system pathologists really around
the world is doing, which is he was staining for the presence of spike
protein and tissues. Right, it's a special stain, So you take the
tissue, you put it on slides, you apply these stains to look for
different cells. I mean, there's tons of different stains that pathologists use to
see what's really going on in the tissues. And he started staining for slike
berks, and he found spike disseminated everywhere brain, kidney, muscles, heart,
particularly the vessel walls. And of these people who died, many of
them young a oric dissections, you know, heart attacks, all sorts of
things. And so we know that some people turn into and I use the
term kind of spike factors. They make an awful lot of spike. And
I just can't believe this is where we are now. I mean, literally,
we're living in a world where we launched a barely tested novel technology that
has all of these words from contamination to shedding, and we chose a protein
that was toxic. Right. So they could have chose the nucleocaps it or
the envelope, right, But for whatever reason, they chose the spike.
And you know, the more cynical of us can debate whether that was willful
or reckless or an accident. I don't really care, because it just is.
Do you think that aside from being laughed at? Because I did call
the lab, I wanted them to test for spike in my biopsy mmm,
And well ostensibly there wasn't enough tissue to do that. So and I get
that that might be valid or they just maybe had no clue because this was
a year and a half ago. So I don't know. Maybe if more
people start asking, you know, they might just get Heismand but I don't
know, do you think do you think that's worth our time? Well,
you know, I'm not in the system anymore, but from what I understand
that they're not doing that. The corners aren't doing that, and that's willful.
I mean, you know, as Ryan Cole says, you can't find
what you don't look for and I clearly don't want to find and tell people
that they're you know, I do know of a number of cases where there
are a couple of pathologist who, like Ryan, does them as a second
opinion, And there are cases of cancers where they're finding spike all within the
cancer. And so I mean those that have done it, it's absolutely alarming.
It's including Burkhart. So but yeah, I don't know that the average
person can ask a pathology department to do a stain for it. Maybe you
can, maybe you can't. I don't know. So Lastly, doctor Corey,
when I had my event, I got on ivermectin, I had a
thing of ivermectin. I did everything I do for colds or whatever. I
did the quercetin and the zinc. And you know all that that is on
the eye prevent is that the eye prevent absolutely Okay, So can you direct
people maybe where to go if they're experiencing this what to do? Look,
I don't think people want our freaking out, but it's concerning, and we
just want to know over what we have control. Yeah, and yes,
it's always uncomfortable to bring forth a major problem without a solution, and I
wouldn't call I prevent a solution, it's a suggestion. I mean, we
chose really safe pharmaceuticals and nutraceuticals that really great safety profiles, have excellent mechanisms
of action pharmacological macros which really counteract some of the path of physiology. And
so we're just kind of putting out there like if your word or getting symptomatic,
do these things, and if you see in a lot of not a
lot, but in quite a few of the anecdotes, people will share what
they took and that's helped them. Especially that Australian woman clearly ivermactin was really
helpful a blocking a lot of the symptoms, and there's great reasons for that.
I mean, it's a tightly binding one of the more tightly binding compounds
to the spike proteins, so if it binds to it, I hopefully would
mitigate any further press So that seemed that it helped. I saw a few
reports on nato khanes, which is another one which is proteolytic it breaks down
the spike and so those are like suggestion, but again just like we don't
have good clinical data on shedding. You know, these are just kind of
supportive and we know that they're helpful. Some of them are helpful in the
qw COVID from trials, but yeah, this is a different aspect, but
yeah, I would. And some of those are just really good supplements.
Like I'm on Nato khanes, not because I'm worried about shedding, it's just
an excellent supplement. It reduces the rates of ethroscoring, heart disease, hypertension,
it's anti inflammatory, it breaks down spike and so it's kind of in
my little supplement regimen. So these are things that like you could take for
shedding specific or just because they promote health. Right, excellent. Well,
we want to thank you, and can you share with our audience where to
find your sub stack? Yeah? Yeah, yeah. So first off,
maybe I should say the I Prevent Protocol is that FLCCC dot net, right,
So that's my part, that's our nonprofit organization. My substack is Medical
Musings or peer coreymedical musings dot com. And there's a whole series on shedding
there and then I'm just gonna put it out there. I mean, I
have a private practice which is the leading edge clinic. It's doctor Peercore dot
com and that's all me and my partners do is we've been figuring out trying
to help people with vaccine injuries, long COVID and long backs, and we've
learned a ton in the last couple of years and we're learning every day,
every week and again with no help, right, no help. You've seen
the research response by the government. It's literally not one patient has been rolled
in a long COVID trial and there's no long vas right that doesn't exist.
It's all right, right, of course, So but anyway, forgive me
for I complain. But anyway, that's that's where you can find me the
substack as well as the nonprofit and you know where we have our guidance.
Oh, thank you for that. We're gonna we're gonna hope that our listeners
review that series hopefully become paid subscribers. And you, indeed are the evolving
expert. So you want to thank you again for everything you're doing, your
research, your drive to do no harm. I mean that first and foremost
makes you an expert and we appreciate it, and we hope you'll come back,
and we thank you for your time today anytime. Thanks nice to take
care, Okay, I want to encourage everyone again to please visit Pierre Coreymedical
Musings dot substack dot com and please consider becoming a paid subscriber. These guys
have, like many, sacrificed a lot. Doctor Corey and his colleagues,
they've made it their life mission to help those who've been most physically and biologically
abused, let's just call it what it is, by these bioweapons. And
they've gotten nothing but grief from the majority of their profession who continue to coward
a big pharm of bullies and by extension, continue to do arm. And
it's it's inspiring to speak with these people, I got to tell you.
And when you're boggled down with information overload, you're boggled down with life because
we've all got stuff going on. And then you meet someone like doctor Corey
and his colleagues and they're lucid, they're curious, and they genuinely want to
help people. And I got to tell you that's uh. You know,
I'm not a I'm not a preacher, but I wonder if those people and
we all know them and we all aspire to be like them, if that's
not the reason why we haven't been completely obliterated yet because Lord knows we deserve
it. And so if that's the case, I have to again ask myself,
do you want strategic retreat? You just want to go to your mountain
and quit. Yeah, there are days that I do, but I think
they incentivize others to remain engaged in whatever realm you're supposed to make a difference.
And so again I always appreciate doctor Corey coming on the program. All
right, y'all, that's it for today. I want to thank you all
for listening. I want to thank you as always to magic Man Joe Strecker
until next time, who will stand at either hand and keep the bridge with
me. Have a great day.