98 views
•
2 months ago
0
0
Share
Save
Audio
5 appearances
Brigham Buhler is the founder and CEO of Ways2Well, a functional and regenerative care clinic, and owner of ReviveRx Pharmacy. www.ways2well.com www.reviverx.com
Show all
Dr. Ian A. White, Books by Dr. Ian A. White
Mari Dezawa, Muse Cells: Endogenous Reparative Pluripotent Stem Cells
Marty Makary, MD, Blind Spots: When Medicine Gets It Wrong, and What It Means for Our Health
29 views
•
2 months ago
Joe Rogan Podcast, check it out.
The Joe Rogan Experience.
Train by day, Joe Rogan Podcast by night, all day.
Great. Good to see you, my friend.
Thanks for having me. We're back.
My pleasure, always.
Um, lots going on, man.
There is a lot going on, per the usual.
I got fucking allergies, dude. You hear me?
Oh, yeah, you sound stuffed up. I was going to ask.
Crazy. I was like, am I getting sick?
And then I worked out. I'm like, no, I feel great.
Like, physically, I feel great.
I don't know what's spiking right now. Do you know?
I don't know. There's a bunch going on.
Yeah.
Everybody's got sore throats.
It's crazy. They say you don't get it when you live here for, like, a few years.
And then you start getting it a lot.
And I was like, I ain't getting it.
And then about four years in, I started getting these horrible sore throats and
stuffy noses.
Is there a peptide for that?
When I first moved here, the cedar killed me.
I mean, because Houston doesn't have cedar.
So it was pine trees in Houston.
And moving to Austin, the cedar crushed me for the first, like, year and a half.
And then I got over it.
My body just got used to it, I guess.
Yeah, I think my body has to get used to it.
One thing that does help is colostrum.
I take colostrum, that arm row.
Yeah, you can tell the difference?
Yeah.
Yeah.
Makes a big difference.
Yeah.
If you take it a lot, take it every day.
Stay consistent.
Yeah, I think all of that stuff, there's benefits that so many people overlook.
I know.
So, we were talking.
What's the latest?
Man, so I know you just had Secretary Kennedy on a few weeks ago.
Yeah.
The latest is, you know, hot off the press as of yesterday.
I know the administration is still working diligently to reclassify peptides.
I know that that kind of got unveiled on the podcast.
Man, that has been a labor of love for the last two and a half, three years,
whatever it's
been, that we've been trying to get this done.
And I know I said this when I was on here six months ago, but I'm truly the
most optimistic
I've ever been, and with reason.
I want to, like, temper expectations, but, you know, the prior administration
of the FDA
put these things into place prior to Secretary Kennedy and this administration
taking over.
It was almost like a Trojan horse.
They just planted this little bomb in the middle of everything and classified
these peptides
as dangerous, and so I've, for the first time in my life, over the last decade
of 20-something
years of being in healthcare, you know, the, during, before Secretary Kennedy
and this group
of folks were in a position to drive meaningful change, they made these changes
with the peptides.
I submitted 17 FOIA requests, 17 to the FDA.
They have never once responded to a single FOIA request.
Just asking for clarity about safety and why did we make this decision, and
they're supposedly
by law required to respond to this request.
So to go from that environment where you're being stonewalled and you have no
accessibility
and no line of sight and no answers to anything, to being able to at least have
a seat at the
table and a voice is pretty revolutionary.
Well, it's just very helpful that he actually uses them, that Kennedy uses them
and he knows
the benefits of them and he's very educated on it, that helps a lot.
Someone who's actually fit, takes care of himself and uses peptides and
understands what millions
of people know.
Yeah.
I mean, there's millions of people right now that are taking peptides and it's
radically improved
their health and their vitality.
I agree.
And I'm one of them.
I agree.
Yeah.
And me too.
Again, I was the typical American patient.
I was on the cusp of diabetes.
I was obese.
I'm a former fat kid.
You know, everything that could be going wrong in my late 30s was going wrong
because I had
bought into the system and trusted the system and thought, "Hey, if I get my
blood work annually
and I follow the doctor's rules," you know, the system's just not built that
way.
And that's where I think the nuances of peptides are really difficult for a
regulatory body like
the FDA.
And so to, like, systematically try to break it down for the folks that are
legacy employees
at the FDA, I've had that opportunity thanks to this administration and
Secretary Kennedy
and his right-hand girl, Stephanie Spear, has been integral in setting meetings
and trying
to move the needle.
Marty McCary, who's the head of the FDA, I had the privilege of knowing him
before he took
that role.
We testified together at the Senate level.
And Marty, he really is, I don't know if, have you ever read his book?
No.
It's called Blind Spot.
One of the things that I love is I philosophically agree with everything that
Marty laid out.
I mean, what he's saying is dogma and that medicine is so worried about
defending their
principles and where they stand that they're essentially ignoring at times
science and they're allowing
dogma to rule the day rather than letting a pragmatic, authentic, open-minded
view change
your perspective and lends on topics.
And so even with this peptide topic, you know, when I had the opportunity to
meet with Marty
on this topic, he said, "Look, Brigham, I didn't really use peptides in my
practice.
I was a surgeon.
You know, it's not something that I'm intimately familiar with, but I'm open to
understanding
and trying to research and get a better grasp."
And some of the moves that this group of folks have already made at HHS, I don't
know if you're
following what they did with testosterone and hormone therapy.
It is literally what you and I talked about at this point, I think five years
ago, where
I came on and said, all the shit you're being told on testosterone and HRT and
hormones, men
and women, is wrong.
It's dogma.
It's been debunked.
It's not going to cause cancer.
There shouldn't be black box warnings.
The FDA has come to the consensus under this new leadership that that is the
case.
And they are working to remove the black box warning on hormones.
They are working to remove the fear mongering around women's hormones and the
Women's Health
Initiative and all these things.
Because we now know what we've been preaching for almost a decade is that these
hormones are
a crucial building block that allow us to drive health span.
And a lot of the decline that we see in our body is because of the hormonal
decline that
occurs in our 40s and 50s.
Could you please expand on the testosterone thing?
Because one of the things that keeps coming up with people, when I talk to
friends that
are older and I say, hey, you know, you should probably get your hormone levels
checked and
consider getting on TRT or at the very least getting on something like HCG that
can increase
your testosterone.
It'll really vitalize your health.
They get concerned with prostate cancer.
Yeah.
This is the one that you illuminated and you've helped quite a few of my
friends understand.
So please.
Yeah.
So all of the fear with prostate cancer literally comes from a study from the
1930s and it was
a urologist in the 1930s.
The patient population of this study, when we talk about random control trials,
there were
three patients in the study.
One patient dropped out.
One patient was chemically castrated.
The other patient was normal.
So the chemically castrated patient, meaning they have no testosterone.
So if you treat a patient who has no testosterone and you take them from zero
testosterone to normal
testosterone.
So to take them from, let's say, zero to three 50 during that climb from zero
to three 50,
you can increase in theoretically the risk of exasperating a prostate cancer
that's pre pre existing
was the fear.
But as you push past that level to optimal levels, you begin to insulate
against the risk of multiple
cancers.
All of the studies henceforth have shown there is not one single study that
correlates testosterone
therapy to prostate cancer with an abundance of caution.
Some urology practices for patients who have had radical prostatectomies are
reluctant to
prescribe testosterone, but testosterone in no way, shape or form is causing
prostate cancer.
It's a receptor site thing.
So the best way to explain is you can only water a plant so much, right?
So once we've saturated the prostate receptor sites with hormones, they're
saturated.
And when you push past that to an optimal threshold, you get the insulatory
benefits of cancer
reduction that testosterone appears to provide.
And that's why the FDA is looking to change that label and get rid of the black
box warnings
on an array of different things that have been dogma around men and women's
hormones.
When you look at this initial study, why was the one person chemically castrated?
I don't know why.
This is in the 30s.
But since then, here's a really real-world example.
With the boom in testosterone therapy, if there was an increased risk in
prostate cancer due to hormones, you would have seen a
skyrocket in the amount of prevalence of prostate cancer in all of these
practices that are using hormone optimization.
You don't.
You see the same prevalence that we saw prior to hormone optimization and the
boom.
And so we have now seen, I think it's one out of eight men will develop
prostate cancer.
I can't remember the exact number offhand.
And that correlates exactly the same into the patient population that is on
hormones.
Well, the reality is, like, everybody dies with some form of prostate cancer,
right?
I don't know.
I didn't know that.
Yeah.
I've heard Huberman talk about that.
Interesting.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Like, you have a certain amount of it.
It's just...
It really became dogma.
I mean, the study is...
But I understand about the study.
Like, so what was the conclusion of the study?
The conclusion of the study was if we treat men with testosterone, we'll see a
rise in
the precursor hormone that we were worried could correlate to increasing the
risk of prostate
cancer.
But the study was...
And was this only prevalent in this one person that was chemically castrated or
was it in
the other guy?
Correct.
The other guy who had normal testosterone levels had no increased risk.
And you have to push through the threshold.
So think you're at zero and then you're watering the plant.
Once that plant's watered, it can't take on any more water.
So from zero, no testosterone, which is chemically castrated.
You're miserable.
You have no sexual function.
You're at increased risk of all these other chronic diseases that can kill you.
But you're insulated from prostate cancer because you have zero testosterone.
As we begin to raise your testosterone level and saturate those receptor sites,
theoretically,
the concern was we're increasing the potential risk of exasperating of prostate
cancer.
So how was this whole opinion based on this one study from the 1930s and just
repeated ad
nauseam for decades?
Well, it wasn't debunked, I think, until the '90s with a famous prominent urologist,
Dr.
Morgan Tyler, where he began to do research in his practice on men with
prostate cancer.
And he actually began to treat men with prostate cancer with HRT and track the
results.
And what he found was there was no increased prevalence of prostate cancer and
it didn't
exasperate or create additional issues.
And so it was debunked in the '90s.
And then I would even go further to say you launched, I think Pfizer launched
testosterone
cream in like 1990-something, I don't remember, and millions of men went on
testosterone creams.
If it was exasperating prostate cancer, you would have seen it then too.
And so now retrospectively, 100 years later, literally 100 years later, the FDA
and our regulatory
oversight bodies are now changing their lens on men and women's HRT.
It's just so crazy that doctors, I've heard doctors, you have to be cautious
about the
potential prostate cancer.
Yeah.
Like, where do you get this?
Like, and then you tell them, well, there was a study.
And so this is the study they're talking about?
Yeah, that's the study that everyone-
Three people, one of them dropped out, one of them was chemically castrated,
and-
You got it.
And that guy didn't even get prostate cancer.
Yeah.
Please, moving forward, Dr. or Admiral Brian Christine is over the men's health
initiatives
over at the FDA, and he's a prominent urologist who has years and years of
practice of using
testosterone.
Marty, I think, even covered hormone therapy in his book, Blind Spot.
Again, it's a prime example of the dogma of medicine.
Myth becomes reality, right?
And misnomer can be adopted, and then it becomes commonplace.
And now you go to lectures and symposiums where you hear some prominent guy on
stage regurgitating
what he was taught in medical school, or she was taught in medical school.
And then that dogma just perpetuates, and it becomes almost urban legend, which
is crazy
to think.
Yeah.
That's what it sounds like.
That's what's nuts.
Yeah.
It does sound like urban legend.
Another quote that, like, resonated with me from Blind Spot was Marty's book.
Is literally, it's confusing, what was it, dogma with consensus.
Right?
When everyone, groupthink is dangerous when it is considered consensus.
Because groupthink isn't necessarily consensus.
It's peer pressure.
To adopt the values and belief systems of your peers and academia.
And there's an immense amount of pressure to not stray from the herd, to stay
within the
herd, to back your peers, to toe the line.
And we've seen that for the last, what, 20, 30 years.
If you step out of line, and even back to, you know, originally what spurred
this were peptides.
I think a lot of what happened with peptides are that this system is built
under an entire
ecosystem.
It costs $1 billion to $3 billion to bring a drug to market are the numbers
that are out
there.
Anywhere from $1 to $3 billion.
Now they're taking into account all the drugs that don't make it to the finish
line.
But if you really look at the true cost of bringing a drug to market, it's
still at minimal
$300 million to $1 billion to bring a drug or a, uh, any sort of technology
into the marketplace.
Now that whole ecosystem and structure was built around big pharma and the
pharmaceutical
cartels and their attempt to control what hits the market and to protect their
patents and their
technologies.
And so that cost prohibitive process limits, uh, innovation and accessibility,
um, under the
name of like protection and safety.
Um, but in reality, a huge percentage, I guess, one of the things that academia
will say or
some of the naysayers around peptides will say is, you know, the issue with
peptides is
there's not human control trials.
The issue with peptides is there's not enough safety data.
Um, we recently provided the FDA with over 800 different studies that have been
done on an
array of the, of the 19 peptides that were banned under the Biden
administration.
Um, we've also made them aware that we've submitted 17 FOIA requests to the
previous administration
that were never responded to.
So just seeking clarity and answers.
Where were you seeing safety issues?
Because in clinical practice, we just weren't.
Um, and, and I can tell you at WasteWell now we're at over 90,000 patients
nationwide and
peptides were an integral part of our, of, of the practice of WasteWell.
And we did not see a bunch of adverse events.
Um, the silence I think speaks for itself.
I think a lot of it is dogma and confusion and the, the process itself of
bringing a drug
to market where I was going with that is, um, I'm not asking the FDA or a
governing body
to pay for this for patients, right?
It's, it's, it's a nuanced difference that I think even regulators are
struggling to wrap
their head around.
We're not asking for Medicare, Medicaid dollars.
We're not asking for TRICARE dollars.
We're not asking for the federal government to mandate that employers and
employer insurance
programs cover peptides.
If I'm launching a pharmaceutical drug into the market, I'm asking for
everything but the
kitchen sink.
I'm asking for everybody else to cover the cost of my care and this medication.
Peptides, proactive medicine, predictive medicine, preventative care,
personalized medicine is
all cash pay.
It is outside of the existing ecosystem and structure.
And I think that's what makes it so difficult to navigate for regulators
because it's a new
world to them.
If I'm coming from academia where I worked at a hospital where I build insurances
for the
last 20 years, and now I'm working at the FDA where everything we do is giant
pharmaceutical
companies that love the existing ecosystem because it builds a moat around
their ability to monetize
drugs and chronic disease, there's a benefit there to play within that
ecosystem.
But if my goal is to bring innovative products to the market at a cost-effective
price that the
average person can afford with their own cash, you can't spend a billion
dollars to do that, especially when
a molecule is readily available in nature.
that's where this gets so tricky with things like peptides and stem cells and
all of these
products.
They've kind of been placed in this no man's land and they've been convicted of
a crime they
never committed.
And the truth of the matter is they were put in this no man's land because they
just don't
fit in the sandbox of what the system was used to.
Okay.
So we should also clarify that when we're talking about peptides and peptides
being dangerous,
GLP-1s are peptides.
This is a gigantic market right now.
I mean, you're seeing all these ladies that look like they're cutting weight to
make the
UFC flyweight division.
You know, you're seeing everybody that's on these peptides that's losing weight.
Like, I don't know if Oprah's on them, but she lost a ton of weight.
I know there's a bunch of celebrities that you see that get Ozempic face.
Yeah, well, so many influencers too on the academia side go online and go, I
just, I would
never prescribe peptides because I'm a board certified clinician and I only
prescribe things
that have science and data that back them.
And yet a lot of times I'd say, man, you might just be uneducated on this topic
and the nuances
of this topic.
In reality, most clinicians are prescribing drugs off label, right?
So a huge percentage of medical practices use products off label.
It's indicated for one thing or one patient population or a dosage or a chronic
disease
state, but clinicians have the autonomy and the authority to use that drug in a
manner that
it's not indicated for.
And they do that every day.
It's almost time for spring break.
So maybe you're headed to the beach or maybe you're taking the kids on a road
trip, or maybe
you're just taking some extra time for yourself.
No matter what, you deserve a break and a reset and AG1 can help.
AG1 is your daily health drink.
Just one scoop combines your multivitamin, pre and probiotics, superfoods and
antioxidants
to help support a healthy immune system and digestion.
Plus it travels really well.
So you can start working it into your routine, even when you don't have a
routine, just slip
a few travel packs into your luggage and have a nice flight.
I've talked about AG1 for a long time and it's not just me.
I know a lot of people enjoy it.
It's very easy.
It's very convenient and you deserve to take care of your health.
Visit drinkag1.com slash Joe Rogan and for a limited time, get a bottle of
omega-3 vitamin
D3 K2 and an AG1 flavor sampler for free in your welcome kit with your first
subscription.
That's an $111 value at drinkag1.com slash Joe Rogan.
Well, this was the big challenge during COVID, right?
With hydroxychloroquine and with ivermectin.
Yep.
That was the big challenge.
And the real problem is that it interferes with the potential profits of
pharmaceutical
drugs that are approved.
So if you give someone the option to take something that's off-labeled, that's
less expensive,
and then they find out it's effective, and then it gets public, you find out
there's less
people that are taking whatever pharmaceutically approved drug.
Correct.
And so what created this backlash or momentum against peptides, candidly, were
the GLP-1 weight
loss drugs.
So I do want to put them in two different buckets because there's the 19 peptides
that got moved
to the dangerous list with no clear answer from the previous administration as
to why or how.
But what I have seen from being able to get behind the scenes and meet with
lobbyists and
legislators at the state and federal level is the lobbying power of Big Pharma
is real.
It's real, and it's intense, and it is not going away.
It's a lot of money.
And so to put myself in the shoes of somebody, you know, like I've gotten to
know Chris Klump
really well at the FDA, and Chris negotiated the most favored nation pricing on
the pharmaceutical
drugs with Lilly and Novo and all these big conglomerates.
And those companies definitively, you know, publicly and privately are banging
on the table
of legislators and politicians and saying, look, we spent billions of dollars
to innovate
these drugs.
We played within the rules of the system.
And now these drugs hit the market, and you're allowing compounders and small,
independent
pharmacies to rip off our patents, right?
And that's their stance, and they plant that stake way over here.
If that regulator only hears that part of the story, it's a compelling story.
You look at it and go, God, man, poor Big Pharma.
They spent all this money.
But if you zoom out and you know the lay of the land a little bit more, which
is hard if
you don't come from this industry, the truth is always in the middle.
So devil's advocate, of course, you want to protect the patent rights of a
company that
spent billions of dollars to bring a drug to market.
We've covered this before, though.
The dirty secret is a large majority of the drugs that come to market come from
the NIH, and
phase one trials are done at the NIH.
The NIH is funded by taxpayer dollars.
You and I are paying to innovate and create molecules that then get licensed
off to big
pharmaceutical companies so they can bring them through the FDA approval
process.
How is that legal?
It's nuts.
That is wild.
Yeah, it's nuts.
And so I was trying to explain to the existing team at HHS, zoom out.
The system, as much as you are being told failed and let Big Pharma down and
allowed people
to come in and infringe upon these patents, the truth of the matter is the FDA
sent out the
bat signal and said, we can't meet the need of the American people.
There is a backlog on these drugs.
It's on the backlogs list.
Can compounders make these drugs?
This has been a regulatory pathway that's been in existence for 30, 40 years.
It happens all the time.
So compounders respond to the bat signal, begin to make these medications to
the benefit of
the American people during the shortage list.
And then you have these big pharmaceutical companies going, look, they're
making our drugs.
They're violating our patent.
If your concern is that these companies didn't get the juice worth the squeeze
from the patent,
Eli Lilly 7xed the value of their company.
They're worth $800 billion.
They literally are worth more than most developed nations.
This was the biggest blockbuster molecule in the history of the world, in the
history of humanity.
There has never been a drug that is this big of a blockbuster.
The money was made 50,000 times over.
Nobody was harmed.
But when I'm a legislator and I've got somebody telling me, these guys heard us
to the tune
of $7 billion, and I know that's what they're telling these legislators,
because I've met
with the legislators at the state and federal level.
And then I have to go, well, hold on.
The entire compounding sector only does $7 billion.
GLP-1s were $2.5 billion.
I know that's a big number, but that was when you were asking us to make these
compounds.
That number's not nearly as large today, and you also shut down 503Bs, which is
half of
the compounding industry's ability to make these compounds.
The truth of the matter is, it's about $1.5 to $2 billion total that this
industry was able
to compound during the backlog in order to meet the needs of the American
people.
They're going to do $35 to $40 million in just GLP-1 drugs this year in revenue.
So, you're talking an accounting error for big pharma.
And the reason I want to lay all that out is, I'm not here to argue about the
GLP-1s.
It sets a dangerous precedent.
If pharma lobbies hard enough and they're able to get this done, like what they
want to do,
reclassifying all these as biologics, it allows them to extend the patent for
10 to 12 years.
It's this whole shell game, but it sets precedent like we covered before, and
that precedent is
dangerous.
It's a slippery slope because if you do totally shut out compounders from their
ability to make
this for the American people, how long before they move to the next thing?
And in one breath, you've got big pharmaceutical companies saying, I'll use
Lilly again as an
example because they're the main culprit.
Lilly is saying, peptides are dangerous.
They're getting the API from China.
We shouldn't allow these compounders to make peptides.
Meanwhile, Eli Lilly just signed a $7 billion deal to acquire a peptide company
out of China.
China.
So, Lilly's buying a peptide company from China while lobbying government
officials and saying
it's dangerous to use products from China, and these compounders are dangerous,
and nobody's
regulating it.
And there's just all this misnomer and dogma, and it's confusing if you don't
come from healthcare.
Well, it seems like it would be very confusing for a regulator.
Very confusing for someone who's not educated on this to get up to speed.
100%.
And they have so many initiatives and so many things they're tackling.
And then the challenge historically is when you're big pharma, and I think it
was like $31 million
that that industry used in lobbying power last year as an industry, dollars
equal accessibility,
accessibility equals impressionability, and impressionability equals outcomes.
It's like trying to win a debate where I get one minute and the opposition gets
nine minutes.
And in the one minute, I've got to debunk all the lies that the opposition told.
Now, I don't even want to use the word lies.
You can use facts, but like we've said before, facts can be skewed when
delivered inappropriately.
If you say they cost us $7 billion, and we spent $3 billion to bring this drug
to market,
and they're importing products from China, and there's no safety nets, and
nobody's inspecting
them, and this is what we're worried about.
This is dangerous, and this is a liability to the American public.
Politicians ears are going to perk up, especially when you're lobbying them and
funding campaigns
and trying to influence those folks.
But the truth is, yeah, if you take into account all the drugs that didn't make
it, and you
want to cook the books, you can make it look like you spent a billion to $3
billion.
You can also take credit for all the drugs that were launched out of the NIH
that you bought
the rights to and monetized for decades.
And then you can talk about safety, but in reality, there were recalls from
both Lilly and
Novo Nordisk.
There are all sorts of array of issues and label changes, and historically,
even the FDA itself.
This is one of the things with peptides that when I met, when I had the
privilege of meeting
with Marty McCary about, I said, Marty, if we're being honest, this is y'all's
numbers.
60% to 80% of the drugs that make it through the drug approval process will
have a major label
change or recall.
60% to 80% of the medications that come through this process end up having a
major label change
or recall.
What is a major label change?
So they uncover, like, an example with antidepressants, they realize the
suicidal ideation in teenagers,
right?
And they had to change that label and say, hey, not only is this only a
fraction better than
a placebo, right?
Barely differentiates from placebo retrospectively.
And not even close to exercise.
I know.
It's literally, exercise is six to sevenfold more efficacious than an antidepressant.
How wild is that?
Yeah.
And then you go back to the science.
The science was all cooked books.
It was all said that it was serotonin related.
And there was never a single study that correlated depression to serotonin.
It was all dogma created by industry.
And so, again, Marty talks about this in his book.
So I know he's aligned with a lot of these viewpoints.
When it comes down to peptides, though, it gets a little confusing because you're
talking
proactive, predictive, preventative care.
If somebody's taking a peptide to optimize their healing, it's not a chronic
disease related
issue.
The system is built to monetize and profiteer off of treating the symptoms of
chronic disease.
It's become a prescription management system, not a health care system.
And that's the big challenge.
This is an entire paradigm shift that I don't know if all regulators truly
understand.
I think they're trying to wrap their head around it.
I think Secretary Kennedy understands it.
I think a lot of this movement in the American people post-COVID have
fundamentally changed.
Like the view that I've seen is people do now question authority.
People do now question just because something came through the FDA doesn't mean
it's safe.
And just because something hasn't gone through the FDA approval process doesn't
mean that it's
dangerous or doesn't work.
A lot of times there's a reason why, like BPC-157.
There's a patent out of Croatia, I believe, on that molecule.
And that patent is, I think, last three more years.
Why would you go spend a billion to three billion dollars to try and bring a
drug to market that
already has a patent?
The other issue with it is a short-chain amino acid peptide found readily in
nature.
And patent law makes it very difficult to patent what is naturally found in
nature.
And that is why the big pharmaceutical companies are struggling with their
patents on the GLP-1s.
They have patented dosaging and delivery mechanisms.
They're not arguing against the patent.
If you look at the lawsuits that they filed nationwide, they're arguing against
people advertising.
They're arguing against some of the things people shouldn't be doing, rightfully
so, but
they're not arguing against the patent.
Let me ask you this.
So just imagine, and I don't think this is a good idea, but imagine if only
pharmaceutical
drug companies were allowed to make peptides, would they just become legal?
Yeah.
Yeah.
Yeah.
I mean, well, what would happen?
Well, there would be a giant business.
It would be a giant business, and it is going to be a giant business.
The price would raise a little bit.
Yeah, 100%.
But also, the availability would skyrocket, and you would start seeing
commercials on CNN.
Yeah.
EPC-157 helps soft tissue injuries.
Yeah.
Helps this, helps that.
Then you'd throw fit people at the beach jogging.
Yeah.
Yeah.
And I agree with you, but the fear, and this is what I'm trying, I'm viewing it
as there's
three options, and these are the three things that I've seen.
There's the traditional system, the sick care system.
That system is controlled by insurance, big pharmaceutical companies, and
regulators.
Whether intentional or unintentional, this system was cooked.
It's been cooked and baked for a long time, and it is the system that it is.
And we know where that system got us.
That system got us to 1.7 to 1.9 million Americans dying every year of chronic
disease,
more than every world war we've ever fought.
It's got us to be the most obese and disease-riddled society in the history of
humanity, and we
spend more on health care than any other nation.
So that's one option.
Just that.
And then we go-
Just those facts are so crazy.
It's nuts.
And to think that to ask questions or to challenge that system is wrong, and
that's where I am.
I'm so, again, I'm not sitting here, I'm not trying to make this political,
because I really
am not, I don't care, conservative, Democrat, Republican, chronic disease doesn't
care about
your political leanings.
It doesn't care.
Like, disease and death comes for all of us, and my goal is how do we prevent
it?
How do we delay it?
How do we drive health span?
You don't do it playing whack-a-mole and treating the symptoms of a chronic
disease.
You get proactive, predictive, and preventative.
And how do you do that?
Well, you've got to be able to run diagnostic tests and tools.
Well, the insurance companies shut that down and make that really hard to do.
And so in the health care system that exists today, in the insurance model,
prescription
management is the main goal of those models.
And I've said this time and time again, you've got to view health insurance in
America like
car insurance.
It's there if you wreck the car.
We are great at triaging and treating a catastrophic event, heart attack,
stroke, hospitals.
You're in there, something catastrophic happens, we can triage that disaster,
and we can get
you in and out of the hospital.
We are absolutely an abysmal failure at preventing chronic disease and driving
health span.
And the only way to do that is to get proactive and predictive and personalized.
And this entire ecosystem is just not built to do that.
And so my message and what I'm trying to work for is so much bigger than peptides.
I don't want to die on the peptide hill fighting for this, because it is a
small sliver of what
could be our health care establishment, right?
When we look at biologics, when we look at gene activation, all of these
different modalities
that are on the table, large language models, artificial intelligence, tracking
data in real
time, we have the ability to truly drive health span now.
If I have your genetic sequencing and your blood work and your biomarkers and
your DEXA and
your VO2 max, and I put all that into the AI algorithm and we begin to track
you in real
time in your 30s, we are going to know years before a chronic disease ever
shows up on your
doorstep.
The cancer that you get in your 40s started in your 30s, you know, the diabetes
you get
in your 30s started in your 20s.
All of this is preventable.
All of this is preventable through diet, lifestyle, and nutrition.
We're not under-prescribed.
I think that's pretty abundantly clear.
The average American's on four or more prescription drugs.
Like, we can't prescribe our way out of this.
Is that a real number?
Yes.
The average American is on four or more prescription drugs?
Which is insane, and it is because we're a prescription-first society, right?
And we've covered this before, so I hate to beat a dead horse, but, like, when
a primary
care has six minutes on average with a patient and they're limited in what
tests they can do
and what diagnostic tools they can run, and a woman comes in and says, hey, I'm
40 pounds
overweight, I'm depressed, I'm anxious, I'm sad, I'm all these things, their
first move
is to go, okay, well, we've got to get your cholesterol under control, we've
got to get
your insulin under control, I'm going to put you on a weight loss drug, let's
put you on
a GLP-1, and they push them out the door, and they probably put them on an antidepressant
because those are the tools in their tool belt.
But if you were to come into a longevity-based clinic, we're going to run you
through a battery
of diagnostics.
So many men come in depressed, you're not really, it's not to trivialize your
depression.
It isn't that you're depressed, it's that you have a hormonal imbalance, and
your hormones
are so wrecked that you're obese.
Are you obese because your hormones are wrecked, or are your hormones wrecked
because you're
obese?
You know, sometimes that's going to take a nuanced approach and time to uncover,
but we
do know we can fix that, you know, and we know that through fixing those things,
there's
going to be a cascade of benefits that lead into other areas of your life.
Like, Jelly Roll's a prime example.
If he were to go to a primary care, they would have immediately put him on a GLP-1.
He's 500 pounds, you know, and they would have put him on a battery of drugs.
When Jelly Roll came to us, it was like, we're going to make this simple.
We got to fix your insulin.
We got to fix your hormones.
That's it.
We're going to get your estrogen under control.
We're going to get your insulin under control.
We're going to get your inflammation under control.
We're going to put wins on the board, and we're going to methodically walk you
through
this, because people think that, this is the other challenge, even where I was
going earlier,
even in the longevity space, the preventative care space, it's already becoming
what Big
Pharma was.
And this is one of my really big heartburns.
You've got two pathways.
See, the first, the three pathways.
The first is the traditional system.
The second is the cash pay model.
Okay, well, that's kind of merging into two different arenas.
You've got the Peter Atiyah's $100-something thousand dollars to be my client
that only the
richest Americans can afford, and you're going to get top-tier care, and I'm
going to provide
concierge medicine.
Well, 99.99% of America can't afford that.
And then you've got the hymns of the world that are going the route of a pill
mill.
Like, candidly, it isn't about quality of care.
It isn't about helping patients solve a problem.
It's about monetizing a medication and putting a weight loss drug or a peptide
as fast as
possible in that patient's hand so you can monetize the patient.
To me, that's no bigger, different than Big Pharma.
And so my vision for the future is how do we combine the best of both worlds?
How do we take that nuanced concierge care, make it affordable, make it
scalable, and make
it truly drive healthspan?
I don't think the issue is the arrow.
The issue is the archer.
It's the people controlling these systems and always trying to make it about
money and quarterly
earnings and an exit and a strategy.
But if you pivot and you make it about people, and you make it about how do we
help this person,
the journey of a thousand miles starts with the first step.
And Jelly is a perfect example.
If you were in a traditional model, he would come in and you would sell him a
weight loss
drug, and that's the end of your journey with him.
You get him on a weight loss drug and you hope for the best and you push him
out the door.
In our model, we're there to be a passenger alongside you, using large language
models,
wearables, and all the things we're bringing into the business to track,
diagnose, and optimize
where you're at in real time.
So in real time, we're able to capture how are you trending.
We even added a scale that ties into the app that will allow you to manage your,
not just
your BMI, but literally almost like a DEXA with like a 1 to 2% variability rate.
We can tell you how much lean fat, how much visceral fat, how much subcutaneous
fat, and
anyone who's a member gets that scale, scans it into the app.
That combined with your VO2 max, if you come into the clinic, we can cross-reference
it with
a DEXA.
The app will do its own algorithms to see how different it is.
And now in real time, from your home, you can track all these modalities and
you can track
how you're trending on more than just blood work.
Like to me, everyone, again, when I came on here, whatever, I think it was five
years ago
by now, Joe, nobody was doing cash pay blood work.
Now everybody's doing cash pay blood work.
And I think it's great, but it isn't the holy grail.
That's just one marker in a sea of markers, one diagnostic measuring stick in a
sea of diagnostic
measuring sticks.
So the future for me is how do we make it affordable and how do we make this
where everyone can afford
it?
One of the things we're going to do is put our money where our mouth is.
You're going to be able to load your blood work from anywhere.
I don't care if you got it at your doctor, your primary care, if you got it
from HIMSS,
if you got it from function health, doesn't matter.
If you want a nuanced approach and help on your healthcare journey, not the
first step,
you took the first step, you did the blood work.
Now, what do you do with that data?
What do you do with that information?
Even in the longevity space where I was going with that is so many companies
are trying
to let me monetize this blood work.
Let me monetize this test.
Let me monetize this peptide.
But what we should be asking is, how do I help this patient?
How do I help this person?
Because if you help that person, they tell the fucking world.
I think the problem is, like, you're an actual good dude.
You're an actual good person.
I'm trying.
There's a lot of days I don't know.
But you are.
I've known you for a long time now.
And you really are doing what you're saying.
I know you could be making a whole lot more money than you're making.
And I know you're not money driven.
But that's not the business of healthcare.
That's not the business of all these different companies.
When they exist, especially if they're public, if these are public companies,
they have an obligation to their shareholders.
They have to maximize their profits.
And, you know, it's so fucking hippie to say this.
The root of all evil.
It's real.
I mean, that is a real thing.
Like, there's nothing wrong with money.
But there is wrong with the motivation that comes with money,
that you put money above everything else.
I mean, I know Waste of Well is doing great,
and I know you're making plenty of money.
But most companies are only trying to do that.
Whereas you are trying, legitimately trying, to make people.
But I know, I see the look on your face when people get better.
I love this stuff, man.
I know you do.
I really love it.
I know you do.
And like Denise and I said from day one,
I've known Denise, I mean, 20-something years, man.
And when we started this, she's my Jiminy Cricket.
Because even if I ever wanted to make it about money,
she's never making it.
She's such a patient care advocate.
And I said, and she said,
if we always make this about people,
there's going to be days we lose,
there's going to be days we win.
But if we always make it about people,
if we make people our northern star,
that is our secret sauce.
And it doesn't mean we're perfect.
Like, look, every time I come on here,
we get blasted because we grow so fast.
And it's a blessing.
And I can't thank you enough.
But, you know,
you can't onboard 20,000 people overnight.
And then people are like,
oh, you guys suck.
Y'all are like everybody.
And it's like, no, man.
We just, even as we're growing,
this is, again, back to that dogma of like,
how are companies like HIMS scaling nationwide?
They're PE backed.
BlackRock is one of their biggest investors.
HIMS is a multibillion dollar conglomerate marketing firm.
They're not a compounding facility.
They're not a medical practice
with brick and mortar clinics
that are trying to truly innovate
and that are into things like biologics
and plasmapheresis
and all the things that we're trying to do.
I can't compete with the scalability of that.
But what I can compete with
and I can destroy is the quality.
Because if we provide quality care
and we make sure that we scale
at a level that is true
and holds integrity
to the patient relationship,
that's one of the biggest things I saw.
I even came on here
and there's things that I've gotten wrong.
I thought the fastest way to scale
and to meet the needs
of the American people is AI.
And I still believe that.
But where I got it wrong
and where I think the nuance is important
is I've had this epiphany,
AI is a tool.
But like all the other tools,
at the end of the day,
everything always starts with people.
Everything.
The entire human experience
doesn't exist without people.
So like there is never going to be
anything more meaningful to a person
than another human supporting them,
caring for them,
and being in their corner.
And that is the importance
of a clinician relationship.
And having clinicians
that are employees of an institution,
not hourly people
who are paid to hop on a call
and on a Monday they're pulling babies
and on a Tuesday
they're a testosterone expert.
That is what a lot
of these telemedicine companies are now.
And it may provide accessibility,
but is that optimal care?
Is that preventative care?
Or are we back to that same conundrum
of how do we make a quick buck?
How do we get this guy
on a bunch of peptides
or girl on a bunch of peptides
and we push him out the door?
And that is one of the challenges
of even this emerging market
is people are compromising pretty quickly.
And even this market,
I see the flaws.
And those flaws
are going to bring out the naysayers.
And those naysayers
are going to use the bad actors
and the bad examples
to crucify the industry.
And I'm banging the drum a lot
against HIMSS right now,
but I tried explaining this
to Secretary Kennedy
and the administration.
HIMSS did a Super Bowl ad
where they made claims
and they used the,
literally the GLP-1 brand name
of Novo Nordisk drug
and violated the law.
And I told the administration,
there is no way
that a multi-billion dollar conglomerate
would make this mistake.
This is the equivalent
to somebody coming
into your living room
and taking a dump
on your dining room table
and you assuming
that it was an accident.
How do they violate the law?
What do they do?
You're not allowed to,
so when you're compounding a medication,
you have to use
the compounded name,
the generic name,
not the molecule's name,
not the brand name.
So it'd be like saying,
we have Kleenex
for cheaper than Kleenex,
right?
and we have the exact same compound.
It's technically,
is it the same molecule in theory?
Yes.
But in marketing,
one,
you're not supposed to market
if you're compounding.
You're not supposed to market
direct to consumers
like Big Pharma does.
So there's a lot of like guidelines.
They spent the money,
they got the patent,
all of this.
The reason that's important
is that Trojan horse was set.
It created an extreme backlash
from regulators,
both senators,
congressmen,
congresswomen,
politicians
from all different walks of life
came out saying,
this is unacceptable.
All of these people
making black market peptides
and GLP-1s
and marketing direct
to our consumers
and violating patent laws
and infringing upon
these pharmaceutical companies.
All of that shakes out.
Statements made
by all these varying politicians
and then what happens
within a week?
HEMS inks a deal
with Novo Nordisk
to bring the pharmaceutical drug
to their practice
and have a sole source agreement.
So they set a landmine
in the middle of all compounders
and I'm trying to explain
to the administration,
you got to understand,
they're not a compounding,
they're a multi-billion dollar
marketing firm.
There's no way
this was an oversight
or a mistake.
This was by design
and then what happened
is the largest run
probably in the,
I don't know,
in the last decade
of any stock price,
HEMS is shot through the roof
because they inked the deal
with Novo
and said,
now we're going to provide you
with the brand name
of the drug
after they had set
this landmine off
in the middle
of all of these compounders.
And so the reason
that's important, Joe,
is there are bad actors
doing things
that I think are doing them
by design
to damage the industry
and to create
a battle cry
and a resistance
against the folks
who are trying
to follow the rules
and navigate
a very narrow pathway forward
where these peptides
and these treatment modalities
are available
to the public.
All the while,
while they have an agreement
with this pharmaceutical
drug company.
You got it.
The deal was done
within two weeks.
Oh, boy.
Backlash came.
A huge uproar
against...
And this is...
The reason this is so important
is I was literally
doing calls
with the administration
to go,
hey,
I get why Big Pharma
would be upset
and they should be.
And I get why you,
the administration,
would be upset
and you should be.
But please,
do not punish
an entire industry sector
for one bad actor.
And at the time,
I was scratching my head
going,
this just doesn't make sense.
Why would they do this?
They're going to get hammered.
They will not win this
in the court of law.
This is a terrible idea.
None of it's adding up.
And then a week later,
they make this announcement
and the stock roars.
And, you know,
everyone goes,
oh, congrats,
Hems.
And it's like,
no, this was...
And we'll find out
because there is a huge
class action lawsuit now,
an antitrust lawsuit
that's going on.
I think Lee Rosebush
and his firm
brought it forward.
He's a...
a guy who's
academically trained.
I think ran the clinic
at the Mayo Clinic,
ran the lab.
He's a pharmacist.
He's a law degree,
all these things.
And he's in this industry
and in this sector.
And he's asking
a lot of questions.
And I think his firm
filed a lawsuit
against Hems
to try and uncover
what really happened there.
But even if it does
get uncovered,
what's going to change?
No one's going to pay attention.
It'll, you know,
it'll be a blurb
in the news.
It won't even be in the news.
Yeah.
You know,
it'll be online somewhere.
Well, the main reason
I want to give that tidbit
of information
is regulators
and politicians
are looking and going,
God, man,
yeah, these guys
did bad things.
No, the guys
that were doing
the bad things
already inked
their backroom deal
and rode off
into the sunset.
So now what is left
for the rest of the industry
and where does this go?
And that's a slippery slope.
And again,
separate from peptides,
separate from compounds,
you get into the whole world
of biologics
and the future of biologics
and stem cells
and creating a regulatory pathway.
And again,
Secretary Kennedy,
he tweeted this,
I think before
or right when he took over,
save your records
and pack your bags.
Your war on stem cells
and peptides are over.
And I can tell you
from my meetings now
further down the line
with the FDA,
I have just a more,
I mean,
I hate to concede,
but I have a more
nuanced lens on
they're trying to navigate
an absolute nightmare
of regulatory landscape,
of, you know,
the lobbying power,
the impression,
the half-baked truths,
where does the truth lie?
Well, this is how
this entire system's built.
Well, this is what we know.
Well, we don't really know
cash pay.
Well, we don't really,
right?
The whole model is
get a drug approved,
it costs billions of dollars.
Now we've got to lock
in that patent.
Now we've got to let
these companies make
a bunch of money on it
because they innovated it
and we've got to
get it on insurance
formularies,
Medicare, Medicaid,
and TRICARE.
That's a whole fundamental
difference when you're
talking about even,
like, let's shelf
peptides for a second,
say stem cell therapy.
My whole mission statement
on all of this is
to build a life raft,
right?
Henry Ford said
if we would have asked,
if he would have asked
clients what they wanted,
they would have said
a faster horse,
right?
I'm not going to the FDA
going, guys,
how do we solve this problem?
I think the FDA
has enough of their own problems
just trying to manage
the system the way it is.
My vision is
you build a life raft.
You build a life raft
parallel to the existence,
much like Uber did
with taxis.
And you let this go this way
and you dry drag race
it against this way
and let's see
who can prevent
chronic disease.
Well, the problem is
it killed taxis.
Yeah.
That was a bad example.
Well, I think
the question is
which model
is going to be better
for humanity
and which model
is going to take cost
out of the system?
Right.
And so I would tell
a regulator,
a congressman,
a congresswoman,
anybody who will listen,
guys, my model
costs you nothing.
I'm not asking
for taxpayer dollars.
I'm not asking
for any sort of indication
where I can bill
insurance companies
or I can bill
Medicare, Medicaid,
or Tricare.
What I'm asking
the federal government
to do is to trust
the sacred relationship
of a clinician
and a patient
and to allow a patient
to have sovereignty
and autonomy
over their health.
If I'm Brett Favre
and I'm diagnosed
with an advanced stage
of Parkinson's disease
and it's a kiss of death,
why would I want
to wait 10 years
for something to make it
through the FDA approval process
that could change
or save my life today?
And if I have the means
to pay for those things
and the accessibility
in a clinician
who thinks that
they have an answer
to slow
or help potentially
improve the progression
of a chronic disease
or an ailment,
I just don't think
the government
should stand in the way
of that.
And the reality
is that the momentum
of the current
healthcare system
is so strong
that the vast majority
of Americans
are going to use
that anyway.
It's not like
it's going to
completely disrupt
the system.
like most people
like, I mean,
how many people
are listening to this?
You know, I mean,
it's still a small
percentage of just America.
Yeah.
The vast majority
of people are just
going to trust
their doctor
and they're going
to do what
they've always done.
They're not going
to be aware
and it's going
to be business
as usual
and those companies
are still going
to grow.
Yeah.
It's just,
they're so greedy.
They want all of it.
Yeah.
Like by saying
they're losing
$7 billion,
how much did you make?
This episode
is brought to you
by Athletic Brewing.
Athletic Brewing Company's
non-alcoholic beer
is a total game changer.
The first time you try it,
you're like,
wait,
how is this non-alcoholic?
They've won
185 Global Taste Awards
and they've got
a ton of different styles.
You get the ritual,
you still get the taste,
just without the hangover.
They've got everything,
Goldens,
IPAs,
Light Brews,
even this new
Lime and Salt one
if you want
something refreshing.
Whatever the mood calls for,
they've got the flavor.
You can find
Athletic Brewing
at over 75,000
grocery stores
or liquor stores,
bars and restaurants
nationwide,
or you can grab
some of their
limited release stuff
directly from their website.
Go to
athleticbrewing.com
slash rogan
to find stores
near you
or get brews
shipped
right to your door.
Use code rogan
to get 15% off
your first online order.
near beer.
Terms and condition
and certain limitations
apply.
Athletic Brewing Company
fit for all times.
You know what I mean?
Well, that was my point.
Right, they're not losing
any money.
If you give those
bad facts
to a politician
or a regulator,
they go,
oh my God.
They cost you
$7 billion.
You made $800 billion.
Your market cap
is eight.
You 7xed your company.
Novo Nordisk
3 or 4xed their company
in literally
a three-year time frame.
These are some
of the most rich
and powerful companies
in the world.
Your patent worked.
It worked.
It upheld.
You prevented
regulatory landscape
from coming in
and people
taking a piece
of your pie.
In fact,
I would argue
it worked too well.
You know,
in a way,
like,
so to over-regulate
based off,
and that's the argument
with the GLP-1s
in one bucket.
My argument,
you know,
for allowing compounders
to continue
to make these
patient-specific
are you need
to allow patients
to be able
to titrate up
and titrate down
and avoid
catastrophic muscle wasting.
What about patients
who have allergies?
What about the next time
these things go on
a backlog?
What about a patient
who maybe can't
handle the
delivery mechanism?
I mean,
there's dozens
of different reasons
why you would want
to provide
an alternative life raft.
Can you explain
the titrate up
and titrate down thing?
Yeah,
so historically,
the GLP-1s
came in preset dosages.
Right.
And so patients
did not have a way
to titrate up
or down,
and so a lot
of clinicians
who wanted to microdose
would use a compounding pharmacy
to prescribe
those medications
and allow patients
more flexibility
on how they dose
their GLP-1.
Because some of the
catastrophic side effects
come from a large dose.
Correct.
Now,
as this thing evolves,
the question becomes
where do we go
with this, right?
Because essentially,
most compounding
has shut down
GLP-1s,
503Bs,
which B stands for bulk,
like big mass production.
I can sell big bulk items
to hospitals
or to clinics.
The government's come in
and said they're not
allowed to make
the weight loss drugs anymore.
So it's now limited
down to just 503As,
which are patient-specific,
which is like what I do.
Like we make medications
unique to the patient,
personalized medicine.
And so that's a much
more niche
percentage of the market.
And again,
even that,
you're talking
in the heyday,
maybe $2 billion
for the whole industry,
on a company
that's worth
$800 billion
and 7X their revenue,
everything's going
to be okay.
Like everyone's
going to be okay.
Patients had accessibility
and affordability.
And I think
the battle cry
from the big
pharmaceutical companies
is a little misleading
if you don't know
the nuances
of all of this.
So what do you think
is the best way forward
if you were in charge
of regulating?
There is an issue
with accessibility
and there's an issue
with black market.
Correct.
Right?
There's an issue
with people buying peptides online
that are not even
what they say they are.
Like there's certain peptides
that have a physiological response
when you take them,
like CJC ipamoralin.
You can feel it
when you take it.
I know people
that have bought stuff online
and they say,
I don't think this stuff
is legit
because it's not doing anything
once I take it.
I don't feel that,
you know,
that weird flushing response?
They don't feel it at all.
And they've asked me
for advice.
No, I love that you had,
because I actually
had the privilege
of giving this,
you know,
message to Marty McCary
at the FDA
and also Chris Klump
who have been receptive
to at least hearing
the other side
of the equation.
And to be clear,
when it comes to peptides,
Chris,
Marty,
Stephanie,
Spear,
Bobby,
all of them are aligned.
Like peptides,
I'm being told are done.
It's just a matter of when.
I don't have that timeline,
but it's a huge win
because it goes so much bigger.
I cannot stress Joe
how close
preventative longevity-based medicine
was to being done.
Because if you shut down
all compounders
throughout the country
and they've already gone
after the black and gray market,
the FBI has shown up
at these people's doors.
And if Kennedy
wasn't the secretary
and if the Maha movement
hadn't started,
it's over.
It's over.
It's over.
So if Kamala Harris wins,
it's over.
Yeah.
And on that note,
even here in Texas,
this is where this is crazy.
I've gotten to know
several of the congressmen,
congresswomen.
Lacey Holes,
a congresswoman here in Texas.
Senator Coalhurst,
I believe she's over
the health care committee
for the Senate.
Senator Coalhurst
was looking at
forming her own FDA
for Texas.
That's how serious
that was getting
because they knew
that of everything
that's happened,
where this would continue
to head,
and states were looking
to potentially hedge
their bet
to protect
their state citizens
from the federal guidelines
that could be
restrictive
or preventative
for care,
which is crazy to think.
So when I laid this out
for Marty,
one of the things
I explained were
here's what the naysayers
will say.
We don't want it
to be the Wild West.
You're going to
grandfather in peptides
and give people
accessibility to peptides
and that would be
the Wild West.
And my answer to that
is we are living
in the Wild West.
Today is the most
dangerous time
it has ever been
in the history of peptides.
Peptides have grown legs,
the cat's out of the bag,
everyone knows
what they were,
they got a taste
of the efficacy
and the benefits,
and patients aren't
going to stop using them.
So right now,
four out of five peptides
being filled
are being filled
through gray
or black market solutions.
When Eli Lilly
and Novo
throw out
a $7 billion number
where they're cooking
the books
is they're not
telling legislators
that a lot of that
is gray and black market.
Four out of five.
Meaning there is
no clinician
in the chain of custody.
The majority.
The majority.
Four out of five.
This cookbook
$7 billion
is black market.
Correct.
And again,
even in the black market.
And many of them
aren't even real.
Yes.
And I want to be clear.
I'm not,
even in the black market,
I know,
and I've validation tested
and done independent
validation testing
of a lot of these companies.
And some of them
are efficacious.
Some of them are real.
And some of them
are not.
What is the percentage?
Roughly.
A large percentage
is off
like in sometimes
dosed higher,
you know,
so think about
if you were to get
like a GLP-1
and you're injecting
a dosage that's 2x
what it should be,
right?
You could have muscle wasting
or all sorts
of catastrophic events.
And this is just
because of a lack
of regulation.
Correct.
There's no regulation.
There's no regulation.
There's no oversight.
And these companies
attempt to operate
through a loophole
and that loophole
is they claim
it's for non-human use.
I actually had a call
with a really prominent
peptide company
and their CEO
who's an Ivy League guy
and I get on the phone
with this guy
and he's wanting
to huff and puff
and tell me
how I don't know
what I'm talking about
and that he's safe
and that he has
written legal opinions
and that he knows
what he's allowed to do
and not allowed to do.
And I said,
well,
I can tell you
from history
what I've seen.
You are using influencers
to advertise
for human use.
You say on your label
non-human use.
But the second
somebody has
this event
and has something
catastrophic happen,
ODs or dies,
the DOJ is going
to show up
on your door
and when they do,
they're going to subpoena you
and when they do,
they're going to uncover
that you were paying
influencers
to advertise
these products
for human use
while putting on the label
they're for non-human use.
So you are knowingly
and willingly
circumventing
the safety
and the laws
of the land
to push
a legal compound
into a marketplace.
I'm just telling you
how this is going
to play out.
I'm not hoping
this for anybody.
And this was about
eight months ago
and now it's happened.
Now the FBI
has shown up
at multiple
gray and black
market peptide facilities.
If we're being honest,
it's 100%
because of Red or True Tide,
the next blockbuster
GLP-1
that is in the works.
Can you explain that?
Yeah.
So Red or True Tide
is a triple agonist
being developed
by Eli Lilly
and so it hits
three different
receptor sites.
It has less
muscle wasting,
much better
safety profile,
lower side effect profile,
but people drop
substantial amounts
of body fat.
And that drug
is not on the market.
It has not made it
through phase three trials.
It's not
commercially available.
So we got a letter
as a compounding pharmacy
under the FDA guidelines
telling us
it is illegal
if you make this
and we will come after you.
So we've never made it
because we're a compounding pharmacy
that has to follow
the laws of the land
because the state
and the federal government
inspect us.
Right before we came on,
I was telling you,
the FDA has been
in our building
five times in four years.
The states have been
in my building every year
and I'm in 47 states.
So almost every state
we're literally
in an inspection
all the time.
There are plenty
of safety nets.
We independently,
third-party verify
every dosage.
We buy API
from what's called
the green list.
The green list
is a list established
by the FDA
that tells us
you can buy
these pharmaceutical ingredients
from these ingredient manufacturers.
What does API stand for?
It's pharmaceutical ingredients.
It's just the base product
used to compound
a medication.
None of those
checks and balances
happen in the gray
and black market.
Again,
it's not saying
that all those guys
are bad
or that their product's bad.
But regardless,
whether...
They're not regulated.
100%.
There's no regulation.
There's no checks
and balances.
So if I'm...
It very least
leaves the door open.
Correct.
It leaves the door open
and if I am a patient
who wants to get
on a weight loss drug
and I can just buy it online
and not have to go to a doctor
and not have to go to a clinic
and get blood work
and I can just buy it,
there's no doctor,
there's no pharmacist,
it's drop shipped to my house.
What's even scarier though
is there's no dosing instructions.
There's no way
to reconstitute it.
There's no explanation
of how to reconstitute
because once they're teaching you
how to reconstitute
and mix it,
they're taking part
in medical administration
and so these companies
have avoided all of that
and people were using
things like ChatGPT
but now ChatGPT
and all the large language models
have shut that down.
So now what you have
is American people
buying random product
online with no guidance,
no oversight,
no clinician
in the chain of custody,
no checks and balances,
no state or federal regulators.
We are living in the Wild West.
So my message to Marty
and if you want to fix this,
how you fix it
is you bring back
where we were
prior to the mistake
of the Biden administration
where they pulled
these peptides
from the market
with no safety data
that can support
their actions
and you put it back
in the hands
of trained clinicians.
You require people
to go through
the process
where they have
a clinician
and a pharmacist
and a compounding pharmacy
under the right guidelines
regulating the space
because we know
no peptides are safe.
Like they are safe.
They're 200 peptides
are found naturally
occurring in the human body.
These are raw elements
that are readily available
in nature.
The question is
sterility,
efficacy,
and safety.
And through the proper
checks and balances,
we can minimize
most of those
side effect profiles
and optimize
positive outcomes.
but it requires
restoring law
and order to the land
and implementing things
the way they were
before the mistake happened.
And that's all
I've been trying to argue.
There's a way to fix this
and if you do that
overnight,
as much as I hate
to say this,
you make these big
pharmaceutical companies
ecstatic
because you just got rid
of four out of five
weight loss drugs
that were being filled
with no clinician
and you do push it
in a way back
to the traditional system
with the checks and balances
that these regulatory bodies
are so worried about.
And the only argument
against that is,
well,
peptides don't have
enough robust
human clinical trials
with safety data.
And then you go down
that topic
and I'm like,
guys,
you do realize,
like we said,
like 60 to 80% of drugs
have a major label change.
These are the drugs
that make it through.
Separate from that,
every product
that's in the operating room,
I've covered this
every time I've been on here,
every single 90%
of the products
in the operating room
never had a human safety study.
They were all brought in
through the 510 approval process.
Doctors are using things
every day in practice
that are either off-label
or not validation tested
or have no human safety studies.
It is commonplace
in medicine every day.
So to make it
this big to-do
that all of a sudden
it's dangerous
the most dangerous time
we're living in
is right now
with no checks and balances.
If we get this done,
you've now built
a regulatory pathway
that provides affordability,
accessibility,
personalized medicine,
predictive care.
It is such a big win
beyond a peptide
because it candidly
saves the industry.
I can tell you,
owning clinic,
owning a telemedicine company,
owning all of these things,
none of that machine works
if we can't create products
if we can't create products
that help people.
Right?
And so,
quality,
products that are available
without quality
are even worse
than quality products
that aren't available.
You know,
and those were our two options
right now.
It's like,
they can't get a quality product
and then we can't sell
the quality product.
But this change
will allow us
to sell safe
and quality products
with the proper checks
and balances.
And it also builds
a regulatory pathway
that I think
sets us up
for long-term success
with things like stem cells.
Well,
it seems like
such a reasonable concession.
You cut out the black market,
you regulate stem cells
and you regulate peptides,
you regulate everything
that's being done
through compound pharmacies.
Everybody wins.
I agree.
That's the message
that I've had.
I don't think
the pharmaceutical drug companies
want everybody to win.
Correct.
They want only them to win.
Correct.
So any profit
that you make
or any compounding pharmacy makes
in their mind
is stolen from them.
Correct.
Which is wild.
Yeah.
And that is the big challenge
is the future
of this regulatory pathway
and that's where
I wanted to get into the state.
And this is something
that what we saw
with the food lobby,
when we testified
at the state level
for the food program,
for the SNAP program,
for the school lunch program,
trying to align
the state
with the new goal
of the food pyramid
and the new food guidelines
and get back
to eating real food,
healthy food,
instead of feeding kids
crap all day in school,
the states picked up
the torch
and ran with it
faster than the federal
government did.
And the reason
that's important
is we've now learned
the offense.
Texas passed the bills,
three different bills
around food
and food initiatives
and label changes
and protecting children.
Arizona followed suit.
I think Florida
multiple states
followed suit,
which creates
a trade win
that allows
the federal government
to pick up
what state legislators
have done
and mirror those bills.
So I say that
because I am already
working at the state level
to do the same thing
here in Texas.
So my hope is
that the federal government
and the FDA
get this done
with peptides
and then the next step
would be
can we do the same thing
with biologics
and stem cells,
which are amazing tools
in the tool belt
to drive health span
and help prevent
chronic disease.
The state of Texas
is already raring to go.
So the state of Texas
passed the Compassionate Use Act,
which says
if you have a chronic disease
or any sort of
chronic health issue,
you have the right to try.
So the reason
it's almost like marijuana law
without getting too nuanced.
The states,
if you have a clinic
within the state
and you manufacture
the product within the state
or compound within the state,
in theory,
you can administer
within the state.
And even if the FDA
has a different stance on it,
the state
can have its guidelines
and you can fall
within the rules
and regulations
of the state
and still honor
and respect
the rules of the land.
Does that make sense?
Yes.
Okay.
So Texas did this.
Utah did this.
Florida did this.
And I just testified
in Arizona two weeks ago
on the stem cell bill
in Arizona.
Senator Janae Champ
called me and said,
can you come out
and help testify
and can we do
what you guys have done
in Florida
and some of these other states?
states and right now
it passed through the House
and it's on to the Senate
and the Senate
will most likely
pass this bill.
And so I say all that
to go,
the states right now
are able to move faster
and more nimble
than the federal government
and the states
are building safety nets
and checks and balances
that will still allow
patient accessibility
at the state level.
The problem then becomes
if we can get
the federal government
to follow these same guidelines
and we've also submitted
a citizen's petition
to the FDA
around stem cells
that basically mirrors
the Florida law.
And the whole message
is exactly what you
and I have just covered.
Guys,
these things are safe.
The risk of an adverse event
is minimal.
If it is an adverse event,
it's flu-like symptoms
and it impacts basically
10 to 15% of people.
All of the major adverse events
you've been told
about stem cells
come from
improper chain of command,
improper chain of custody,
and improper checks and balances.
How do you fix that?
You fix that
through creating
a regulatory pathway
with proper
checks and balances,
proper chain of custody,
and a clinician involved
in the chain of command.
If we do those things,
you are going to be able
to provide patients
with affordable,
accessible care
of products that work
that are safe
while the federal government
can work through
do we make this
a billable product
down the road?
Do we build this
into the insurance model?
For me to go fight
to build this
into the insurance model
is a monumental task
that I don't have
the bandwidth to take on.
And I also think
it's the wrong move.
I really don't.
I don't want to be
part of that model.
I want to build a life raft
that allows patients
to make decisions.
And the second you put
this in an insurance model
or a government payer model,
everybody is castrated.
The decisions are made
at the insurance level
and at the government level,
and it just becomes
this nuanced,
challenging thing.
Like an example is
stem cells historically,
one of the uses
for purified amnion
was burn victims, right?
Or wound management
in diabetics.
So what happened?
Orthopedic surgeons
started billing
wound injuries
in order to get paid
from the insurance companies
on an ACL.
Well, that only takes
a year or six months
before the insurance companies
ring the bell
and go,
wait a second, dude.
This person billed us
a million dollars
on wound management
and they're an orthopedic surgeon.
What is going on?
Right?
You just committed
insurance fraud.
And now you've created
this counterculture movement
against stem cells
and purified amnion
and all of these products.
And that's what happened
in real time.
So a lot of what we're living
is the continual dogma
of this broken ass system.
And it creates this trade wind
that doesn't die.
I mean, this was a decade ago.
And now none of this stuff
is covered from insurance.
None of it has an FDA indication.
And all of it's kind of put
in this gray no man's land,
even though it's used
in practices every day
throughout the country.
And now you can legally
use these treatments
in states like Texas, Florida,
Arizona, soon to be Arizona
and Utah.
And so there is hope
because at the state level
it's moving.
I do believe Secretary Kennedy
and Chris Klump and Marty
are very open minded
and receptive to this.
They are very progressive
and they do see
the challenges of this system.
Marty covers it in his book,
like I said.
So I'm more optimistic
than ever that we are going
to get, if we get peptides done,
the next step
is to begin to work
the citizen's petition
to see if we can do
the same thing
for these biologics
and make these things
affordable and accessible
for everybody.
And the thing
that's helping them
momentum, I think,
is that so many people
know people
that have had
stem cell treatment
and have had
amazing results,
like with injuries
that they just couldn't
recover from.
Yeah.
And unfortunately,
some of them
had to go to Panama
and had to go to Tijuana
and Colombia
and all these different places
where it's legal.
Yep.
And that's,
I can't tell you
how many people
that I've talked to
that have an injury
and say,
hey, I'm thinking
about going to Tijuana.
What do you think?
And I say,
it'll help you.
100%.
I've talked to my dad,
he went,
I talked to my uncle,
my grandma went,
this person went,
that person went.
They had results
that they never achieved
doing any other things.
Why is this not available here?
I'm like,
oh man,
it's a long story.
I can't even
start this conversation.
I have to go.
Well,
and what's amazing though
is I'm telling you
we're,
we,
having got to know
Senator Colhurst
and Lacey Hull,
the representative here,
we'll get it done
in Texas.
Like it's coming.
It's the new bill
that we're going to
submit in January.
I feel confident
that we will
expand upon
on the existing
legislation
around patient
right to choose
because I think
it's important
to begin to hedge
against the power
of big pharma
and to try to build
out a model
with peptides
and other things
that we include
in this bill
at the state level
just in case,
you know,
just in case,
not even this administration.
I feel very confident
this administration
is going to get
a lot of these things done
but then what happens
as soon as
there's a change
in power down the road
and how many years
can you fight this lobby,
right?
It's still alive
and well.
It's not going anywhere
but I think it's crucial
that we fight
for sovereignty
and autonomy
over our health
and continue to push.
I can tell you
at the state level
I'm very,
very bullish
that it will happen
and what Florida saw
is a $300 million
infusion of cash
into the state of Florida
built all around this
because it's now
a medical tourism destination
and that's my message
to these senators
and congressmen
and congresswomen
in Texas
is we have
a legitimate opportunity
to do what you did
with the food bill
and the Maha movement
around these initiatives
to drive home
these same initiatives
on longevity
and preventative base care
in the state of Texas.
We have an opportunity
to turn Texas
into a medical tourism destination.
Can you imagine
how many people
would visit Austin
if we truly do build
a proper regulatory pathway
with all the checks
and balances
where people can confidently
fly down here
and know that they can
get these treatments?
And not have to have
a passport.
Yeah.
I mean,
because this is what's going on.
This is why people
are going to Panama
and all these other places.
Yeah.
I mean,
they're desperate
and so they're willing
to leave the country.
Yeah.
100%.
It would be way easier
to just hop on a Southwest flight,
come to Austin,
pretty easy,
a lot easier,
and it should be available.
And what's really amazing to me
with the Maha movement
is watching people scramble
to find some sort of narrative
as to what they're doing
is dangerous
or what they're doing is bad
or what they're doing
is somehow or another
not the way we should be going,
ignoring those facts
that you laid out.
We are the wealthiest country
in the world.
We are the sickest country
in the world.
We've never had more money.
We've never been more sick.
Yeah.
We've never spent more
on healthcare.
We've never been more fucked up.
Yeah.
At one point in time,
does someone say,
hey, this system sucks.
Yeah.
But they don't want to.
They don't want,
they resist this radical change
and this appeal to authority
that these people
that are in control
of all these various organizations,
they know what they're doing.
They are the experts.
We should trust them.
They've fucked this whole thing up.
How are you trusting them still?
When you just said
60 to 80% of them
have either major label changes
or have the products removed,
you think about
all the different
adverse side effects
that are very,
very well known
from various pharmaceutical drugs,
all these different things.
How many times
does this have to happen
before you just want
to rip that Band-Aid off
and do something different?
It's tough because,
and people misunderstand.
I think they misunderstand
even what you and I are saying
because I hear so often
people going,
okay,
it's a conspiracy theory.
They want to keep you fat
and sick
and monetize chronic disease
and there's malicious intent.
I'm like,
no.
What I'm telling you
is this system
was born in captivity.
It's broken.
There's special interests
that are able
to influence accessibility
and affordability of care.
Those decisions
have cataclysmic effects
on our health
as a nation
and on our national security,
how many men
can even qualify
for military service right now?
71% of young kids
can't qualify
for military service.
It's nuts.
And then you look at
how many can't even do,
I think,
I don't remember
what the number,
it was something staggering,
like the average American
can't do two pull-ups
or something like that.
And then you see
Secretary Kennedy
rattling off
20-something pull-ups
at the airport.
At 70.
Which is nuts.
But it's not that,
I'm not saying anyone...
It's not a conspiracy.
It's just,
they are extracting
enormous amounts of money.
They don't want to stop
extracting enormous amounts of money.
They want the system
to remain in place as is
because it's very profitable for them.
But it's just not good for us.
Correct.
And it doesn't mean
it can't be profitable still.
Yeah.
It's just,
you have to have
a workable,
functional model
that benefits
the American people
and benefits health.
I agree.
And that's where I'm like,
guys,
we don't have to...
I'm not saying
if you want to run this system
the way you're running it
and reform it where you can,
I get that.
But I also think
there's an immense value
in building a life raft
just in case.
Just in case.
Why is there any pushback
to building a cash pay model
with a pathway
that allows patients
to access medications
with their own hard-earned cash?
preventative health care
instead of sick care.
You got it.
Sick care that is perpetual
and never-ending
and ultimately leads
to a catastrophic
series of side effects.
You got it.
Yeah.
And I tell people
the difference is
with a peptide
or something preventative,
you're coming in
and we're optimizing you.
Right?
So, you know,
I've taken things
like Dihexa.
You know,
for me personally,
I'm not advertising
this for other people
but it's like
it 100% improved
my neurocognitive function.
It 100% improved
my data recall
and retention.
It moved the needle
and I'm paying
with my cash
to use something
that is doctor-prescribed
and why do I need
anyone else's approval
for that?
I understand the need
to protect the American public
with safety
and that's where I think
improving safety
is important
but the second part
of the equation
with the FDA
is approving efficacy
and approving efficacy
unfortunately with the model
is a multi-billion dollar process.
Those checks and balances
are crucial
when you do a set it
and forget it
healthcare system.
What do I mean by that?
You put somebody on Lipitor
and the doctor doesn't see them
for another year
and that patient
is blindly trusting
that clinician.
That is the insurance model.
The cash pay model
is an educated pay
patient
who's taking their health
into their own hands
and you better believe me
when I say
if you don't put a win
on the board
they're going to fire your ass
because it's their money.
Nobody's going to take
a peptide month
after month
after month
if they don't think
it's doing anything
because they're using their money
not taxpayers money
not an employer's money
right?
The checks and balances
are there
through the consumer market
because it has more integrity
than the traditional model
because this is the only model
where if you don't produce
for the patient
you're fired.
You can't fire your clinician
in the insurance model
because the insurance model
tells you where to go.
And this is an important point
sorry I'm ADHD
but I'm thinking about this
one of the things
that a regulator mentioned to me
was
again
I hate to keep bringing up
these big pharmaceutical companies
but they were lobbying
saying
there's a problem
guys like Brigham
they'll own the pharmacy
but then they also own clinics
and that's vertical integration
and blah blah blah blah blah
and that's not fair to a patient.
Hold on
if you understand
the law of the land
the patient has the right
to take their prescription
wherever they want
even if they come
two ways too well
we may prescribe it
and we send it to me
to my pharmacy
because we compete on price
and I'm going to make this
as cost effective
and as beneficial
to the patient as possible
if I can't compete
in an open market
and make this affordable
and approachable for you
take your prescription
somewhere else
but I'm going to provide
quality, efficacy
and cost
and I'm going to beat you
you're not going to force people
to only get that medication
and what people don't understand
is in the insurance model
a patient is told
you're not allowed
to go to this doctor
you got to go to this doctor
because they're within your plan
and then they go to that doctor
and that doctor goes
what pharmacy do you want
to fill that
well it doesn't matter
if it's CVS
or Walgreens or wherever
the patient's going to have
the same price
because that price
is controlled by the PBM
which is the insurance company
and then that PBM
is monetizing that drug
through rebate programs
it is a totally different
system
that captures a patient
controls a patient
and monetizes chronic disease
my goal
is to help you
drive healthspan
and monetize your health
to help you
want to be a willing participant
because you feel so good
and your mental
cognitive
physical function
your skin
your complexion
what we see
is somebody starts
and it's not
they start thinking
they want to lose weight
guess what
but as soon as a guy
like Jelly loses that weight
now the guy
I was on the phone
with him this morning
he's running five miles
talking to me on the phone
this was a guy
who was 500 pounds
man
this is a guy who couldn't
walk up his driveway
and now he has life again
he's bow hunting
he's like getting into
these hobbies
and these things
when he goes and spends
money on a peptide
it's not because
it's pseudoscience
or it doesn't work
it's because he's a living
example of the impact
it's made on his life
and he is knowingly
and willingly
opting in
to continue to see
how far he can push
this healthcare journey
and how much more
optimal he can get
and in real time
unlike traditional medicine
we are tracking
all of this shit
we're tracking you
via DEXA
we're tracking you
via VO2 max
we're tracking you
via wearables
all of that vertically
integrated in real time
and then we're culminating
that data
across the patient population
so imagine when I get
to a point
in a dream world
what I want is
10-15 million patients
nationwide
we're tracking
all these data analytics
we know that every man
with a gene marker
of P452
who went on testosterone
saw a marked improvement
in REM sleep
right
this is all the type of data
we can extrapolate
but to do that
you've got to have the tools
you've got to have
the peptides
you've got to have
the biologics
you've got to have
the diagnostic tools
like comprehensive blood work
another huge missed thing
in healthcare
and I believe
is gene sequencing
less than 1 in 1,000 people
have ever had
their genome sequenced
we've only sequenced
I think 1 in 1,000 animals
genetics is on the
is in the infancy
of what it's going to be
and a real world example
of that is somebody
like Gordon
who we've been trying to help
and sorry
I know I'm dumping a lie
I want to be clear
I'm not a doctor
right
I'm just a guy
who's trying to solve problems
and everything
that I talk about today
is not me being
a bro science
or me
trying to be an influencer
or the things
that people try to say
everything I discuss
comes from my mentors
and my mentor
is my chief science officer
Ian White
22 years
stem cell research
Harvard and Sare
Stem Cell Institute
Mari Dazawa
who discovered
mu cells
from Japan
and is one of the pioneers
in stem cell research
Mari is an absolute badass
Dr. Deutcher
Stanford graduate
stem cell research
longevity specialist
Ryan Rossner
PhD
worked for DARPA
I'm talking to brilliant people
and I'm doing my best
to learn and distill down
what I'm gathering
from these folks
in a manner that's digestible
for Neanderthals like myself
that's all I'm trying to do
you guys at Ways to Well
are also incorporating
a bunch of other therapies
and I want you to talk
about those too
yeah
I would love to
before I lose
real quick on the genetics
because I'm super excited
about this
so one of the things
we're building into the app
so the next generation
of the app
which will come out
in a few weeks
we're just trying
to improve on
the simplicity of use
the ability to get refills
vertically integrating
into a pharmacy
because so often
patients will fill
a prescription
go to a pharmacy
they don't know
then they come back
and they go
where am I in the refill
and where is it at
in the process
and when does it get
to my house
and what about this
and what about that
and I can't remember
what the doctor said
on the phone
that was the whole point
of Alan
the chat bot
that I showed you
years ago
Alan is a resource
in your pocket
and Alan is there
to pull from your
medical records
to pull from your chart
in real time
to answer any question
about what happened
on that phone consult
with that clinician
because all of that's
annotated
and put into the system
and documented
and so Alan is there
to help answer
and fill in the gaps
and where I was going
with this earlier
is through large language
models in AI
we're going to be able
to scale
concierge medicine
we're going to be able
to scale it in a way
like never before
that allows patients
to get that high touch
high quality care
but for pennies
on the dollar
like my goal
is to make this
as cheap as possible
so everybody
can afford it
and that's the goal
with stem cells too
but it starts
with regulatory pathways
and de-stigmatizing
these treatments
and building a pathway
that everyone can afford
and so one of the things
we're looking to add
to the app
is gene sequencing
there are 20,000 genes
most people don't have
any clue
what genes they have
and the reason
that's important
and what my buddy
Ryan Rossner will tell you
is he's a geneticist
is your genes
are the software
that are telling
the computer how to run
is this the guy
that I met
yeah
yeah yeah
and he worked brilliant
worked for DARPA
tons of experience
at the bench
in the lab
doing genetic research
the stuff he did
for DARPA
was crazy
I mean when he starts
telling you
you know
one of the things
he said is
we're in an era
where we can build
real life X-Men
like we can build
X-Men
there's a gene
a gene editing injection
that can make
your bone mineral density
eight times stronger
what?
yeah
I mean there's
like you could do that?
it's that
you can't legally do it
in the US right now
these are things
that they're doing
are they making
Russian super soldiers
right now?
this is the challenge
it's China and Russia
are pushing the envelope
with all these things
does that change
your body mass?
it'd be interesting
I didn't dig in
with him on that
but it would have to
right?
you would 100%
think it's going to
change your BMI
because your bone mineral
is going to be
much thicker
and more dense
you'd probably be
a lot heavier
so it's going to
change your
DEXA scan
and your readings
yeah
whoa
but the future
to me
I want that
I'm telling you
the future
I want to run through
walls
on that
it's a reddit post
that says
there's a mutation
that causes bones
to become eight times
denser than normal
but the tradeoff
is not being able
to swim
well I can barely
swim right now
as it is man
I sink like a
fucking stone
as it is
it's a real problem
where one of the
things that he's
enlightened me on
because I'm not
a geneticist
I don't know
anything about
that world
he's like
dude if you do
a gene sequencing
test on a guy
like Gordon Ryan
maybe there's a gene
that's causing him
to have these
stomach issues
so we run
the full gene
sequencing on Gordon
at ways to well
and it comes back
and you know
offhand I remember
there's a couple
of really interesting
stuff
Gordon has a gene
that is like
one in ten million
that makes your
tendons
more dense
and more resilient
so stronger
more rigid
tendons
that are able to
are more resilient
to damage
boy does that
make sense
yeah
he has that gene
he also has a gene
that makes his
propensity to have
bone mineral density
higher
that's why his
bone mineral density
is higher
that's why his
bones don't break
as easy
those are some
of the positives
that are in his
firmware
his software
that's running
the biology
that is Gordon
Ryan
now some of the
downside
and this is
this is a really
cool one
because we've been
trying to help
Gordon with this
gut health issue
for years
and it's this
constant battle
of you know
he's getting
staph
now he's on
antibiotics
now his gut
health's wrecked
again
a lot of that
comes down to
he has a gene
marker that puts
him at a
predisposition
to get staph
he has a weakened
immune system
so now he's in
an environment
where he's being
exposed to a
chronic issue
and he has a
predisposition
to not be
resilient to that
issue
and then he also
has a gene
marker
that makes his
gut health
more acidic
and so these are
like rare genes
and he happens
to have these
anomalies
so it's like
in one hand
he has this
perfect
won the
statistical lottery
genetic traits
that put him
in a position
to potentially
be an amazing
grappler
and athlete
but then he
has this
Achilles heel
of his
predisposition
to infections
and his
body's gut
health
and gut
biome
issues
are all
in that gene
they're all
in the software
and so the
premise that
Ryan
and what we're
trying to
evolve and build
out
20,000 genes
most people
don't have any
clue what any
of their genes
are
we're taking
all of the
knowledge that
Ryan and these
geneticists have
and we're trying
to automate it
using the large
language models
and AI
and build that
into the
Ways to Well
app
so alongside
with you know
the VO2 max
the DEXA
go get those
anywhere
I'm not trying
to sell you
these things
I just want
the information
so I can
help you
I don't give
a shit
go get your
blood work
from whoever
if you can
get insurance
to cover it
do it
if you can
get insurance
to help you
with a VO2 max
or a DEXA
do it
they're not
they're not
going to
but shop it
find the best
place for you
and then if you
have that data
when we launch
the new app
we can load
all that into
the large language
models
we can load
in your gene
sequencing
we can begin
to look at you
at a much
broader level
to try and figure
out
where are you
headed
and why
what gene
dispositions
do you have
and how do we
help you
navigate that
that's predictive
medicine
that's personalized
medicine
and nobody's
doing anything
with genes
right now
it's great
everyone
we just got
people sold
on being able
to do blood work
and people are
acting like
that's the holy
grail
and like
I'm a believer
in blood work
but it's a snapshot
of you in time
right
that's a moment
of you in time
what did you eat
that day
how did you sleep
the day before
when did you take
your testosterone
like there's a million
variables that can
throw off your blood
work
you can't lie
on a dexa
I mean that's a real
analysis of your
visceral fat
your subcutaneous fat
how much fat's packed
in around your organs
we're gonna know
all that
how much atrophies
on your left bicep
versus your right bicep
all of those things
like Liam Harrison
was just in
I know you and Liam
are buddies
he was shocked
because he has
that one
bum knee
from all those
years of Muay Thai
and the fighters
just started
picking off his knee
what's crazy
is he thought
he would have
less muscle
on that knee
than that leg
than the other leg
because he's
overcompensated
and trained it
so much
he had more
muscle mass
on the bum leg
than on the
what he thought
was his strong leg
and so he was
like shocked
by that
but it's fascinating
because it's just
data right
and that data
gives you the ability
to navigate
and it gives us
a blueprint
because now
with that data
I know things
like we know
how much bone
mineral density
you're gonna lose
year after year
once you reach
a certain age
we can begin
to quantify that
and model out
your vertebral
risk fracture risk
you know
your hip fracture risk
how do we preserve
bone mineral density
like it allows us
to quantify
are the hormones
and these things
helping preserve
lean muscle mass
keep the body fat off
and optimize bone health
all of these things
and with
with what this FDA
is doing
with men's health
and women's health
and fertility
and the direction
it's headed
I really think
we have the potential
if we pull this off
to enter
a golden era
of health care
I really believe that
but it is gonna require
thinking on orthodox
it is gonna require
a cash pay model
I don't think
we can overhaul
a system
and build in
all these different
modalities
I don't think
we could get it done
in a decade
you know
I really don't
and then how many lives
are lost in that time
that's where I'm pleading
for
let's build a cash pay model
that is a life raft
that's an alternative
and let's build a pathway
that makes sense
that maybe is a more
nuanced approach
to driving health span
because I know
for a fact
Secretary Kennedy
has said
his goal
is to leave a legacy
that transitioned
our broken sick care system
into a health care system
into one that prevents
chronic disease
rather than monetizing
chronic disease
that has literally
been the mission statement
since the day
we opened our fucking doors
I'm like
that's all we're trying to do
and I love it
because then you get
into the fun shit
like
where do we go
with all this
gene activation
and where do we go
with like
the ability
to optimize humans
right
rather than just
trying to keep you
from being sick
we should strive
to make you superhuman
I mean that's really
my belief
like
why do you want
to have normal hormones
when you can have
optimal hormones
normal bone mineral density
when you can have
optimal bone mineral density
that's what I'm talking about
on all of these things
so let me ask you this
about the gene stuff
what do they do
so if they find out
that you have an issue
you have some sort
of a genetic issue
that prevents you
from doing x y or z
what can they do
with your genes
so it varies by gene
but it gives us
it gives us the reason
to try and understand
oh okay
this is why
this has been
a repetitive issue
and it begins to give you
answers to the test
so you're not taking
a shot in the dark
and those answers
will allow us to
hopefully tailor
and develop nuanced treatments
now the future
is they're able
to turn off
and on genes
like a light switch
I don't know
if you saw
like they just
there was a whole article
about they discovered
that whales
have a protein
unique to whales
and they live
over 200 years
and they think
this protein
could be
one of the keys
to driving human health
span and longevity
and it's basically
the premise is
can we synthesize
and utilize
this gene
to turn on
the gene
in humans
and have us
secrete
and produce
a higher level
of this protein
or this amino acid
and would it drive
our health span
and reduce our risk
of cancers
all of those things
so the question becomes
as we evolve
what genes
can we turn on
and turn off
you know
what does the regulatory
landscape of the future
look like in America
China and Russia
are already doing
these things
right
and so
even if we
attempt to fight
the evolution
of science
I think we're going
to look back
in a decade
and go
I cannot believe
we put people
on petrol chemicals
to solve problems
because we're going
to be able to go in
and turn off
or on a gene
and fix that problem
right
at the cellular level
the biological level
you're going to be able
to fix and remediate
so many of these issues
that's all they're doing
with the bone mineral density
is they're turning on
a gene that tells you
to increase your bone
mineral density
or when you look
at the folostatin
you know
that they're using
in cattle
that's just a gene
signal that tells
your gene
hey turn on
and you're going
to put on muscle
and for a 6 to
I think it's a 6 to 12
month time frame
that folostatin gene
will be turned on
and you'll put on muscle
and then at the end
of that
it gets turned back off
so it's like
temporary turning
on a white light switch
and then that light switch
will eventually
revert back
so this
this
Jamie
bring back up
that thing
with the bone mineral
density
does it prevent you
from being able
to swim
just because you're
heavier
is that the idea
I'm assuming that's what
that's saying
because you're adding
so much weight
and mass
to the body
like think about
french bulldogs
and bulldogs
can't swim
because they're so dense
but pit bulls can swim
yeah pit bulls can
but french bulldogs
and english bulldogs
will drown
really
yeah they don't have
enough arm strength
and muscle mass
they're so dense
and heavy
is that what it is
or is it their legs
are so short
it's both
they don't have
the ability to move
to move enough momentum
of that denseness
of their body composition
because little carl's jacked
you ever see carl
carl is like a little
he hates the water
though he might not
like being in the pool
he's a tank
he's smart
well marshall's like soft
marshall's very soft
he swims like a fish
he loves swimming
that dog just
he could swim for hours
that's so funny
he doesn't have any
yeah my french
he loves water
but he can't swim
so he'll go in the shallow end
but he's smart enough
to not get off the step
like he knows
oh that's interesting
yeah
so I would imagine also
there would be
so what's this
I'm just looking
at the comment
this didn't have
a link or anything
it was literally
just a picture of an x-ray
so like not a lot
of information
to pull off of that
unable to swim
is weird
but I don't even know
who posted it
because it's more
difficult to swim
because you're heavier
because like
my kids can swim
you know
because you know
my daughter
my 15 year old
might weigh 120 pounds
or something like that
150
I weigh like 204
I go in the water
I just sink
I can't float
yeah it's
well you don't have
any body fat either
it's dense
it's all muscle
and bone
it's a struggle
for me to swim
yeah
you know
but I wonder
like if
is it
so if your bones
or have more
or they're more hollow
does that help you swim
because they're more hollow
like does that
aid in swimming
what's so fascinating
to all this to me
is
so then you've got
so getting to meet
all these different
scientists right
you got Ryan
who was working
for DARPA
and then I know
Ian who's been
20 years of
stem cell research
and Ian in his book
talks about
that we share
a common ancestor
and I've covered
this before
but Ian hypothesizes
within our genetics
we share an ancestor
with the eternal jellyfish
we share an ancestor
with the Galapagos tortoise
with the Greenland shark
Greenland sharks
don't develop cancer
they live
500 to 600 years
the jellyfish
lives eternally
all of those
black boxes
are within us
if we can find those
through gene sequencing
and we can identify
which gene is doing that
in the animal kingdom
and cross reference that
to our own genetics
the question then becomes
can you either
insert that gene
into humans
or is that gene available
and can you turn it on
and what's the side effect
to turn it on
so individuals
with unexplained
HBM had an excess
of sinking
when swimming
what is that number
7.1136
what does that mean
adjusted odds ratio
with 95% confidence
mandible
so it says
excess of sinking
when swimming
so it just seems
like it's more difficult
to swim
because you're heavier
yeah you're more dense
it's more difficult
for me to swim
associated dysplasia
skeletal dysplasia
that's not good right
what is this
I'm thinking of
hip dysplasia
harbor an underlying
genetic disorder
affecting bone mass
this was just a study
based off of a high
bone density
this wasn't specific
to that
which just makes sense
that they sink more
this is stuff
that's like
in its infancy
but I just think
it's fascinating
right
well that Brian Shaw
dude
that guy can't swim
there's no fucking way
that guy must sink
like a rock
because didn't he have
like the most insane
bone mineral density
tested
they said his bone
mineral density
is one of 500 million
so there might be
like what
eight people
ten people
on earth
that have that
yeah
that's so crazy
and that
I mean
but that's probably
genetics
and also training
right
he's obviously
a strong man
so he's been
lifting enormous amounts of weight
and there's crazy
so they've done
what is it
Devin Lorette
do you know
yeah sure
arm wrestle
yeah Devin came
into the clinic
he's done his gene
sequencing
and it's crazy
like the guy
has so many genes
that are just
statistically impossible
it's like
was this guy
built in a lab
to arm wrestle
it's crazy
like he has
that same tendon gene
he has the bone
mineral density gene
he has some very
very unique genes
and so part of this
is just like
the knowledge
and the excitement
of what can we do
in the future
I don't know
but today I think
you know
knowing your software
that you're running on
it's crazy to think
that everyone knows
which version
of the iPhone software
they've got
you got a 7 point
whatever
but we don't know
what code
our body's running on
but here's the question
these genes
are inherent
to you from birth
or is anything
a result of training
the genes are inherent
to you at birth
and then you do
have epigenetics
and epigenetics
are impacted
by your body
by activity
right
so you may have
a predisposition
to developing
cancer cells
right
that's unfortunate
but you may have that
but that doesn't mean
definitively
you're going to develop
cancer
it just means
you can now make
lifestyle and behavioral
changes to minimize
so if you have
a predisposition
to that
you probably shouldn't
smoke cigarettes
all day
right
we should probably
try to
if you have
a predisposition
to weak bone
mineral density
right
we should probably
make sure
that we never
let your hormones
drop in your 40s
where you begin
that initial decline
in the cascade effect
this gene mutation
seems to also
have a other side effect
of vision loss
because it causes
some eye vascular issues
interesting
yeah and this is one
this is one example
of genes
that they were looking at
I think at DARPA
and some of these
other projects
these aren't things
being utilized
in medicine today
but this is the direction
of the future
I really do believe
that they're gonna
they're going to solve
a lot of these
genetic traits
and be able to figure
out how to turn
off and on
these traits
right
certain variants
in LRP5 gene
interfere with
eye blood vessel
development
causing familial
exudative
what's that word
can lead to
vision loss
vitro retinopathy
which can lead
to vision loss
mutations can cause
varying clinical
presentations
ranging from
asymptomatic high
bone density
to severe skeletal
fragility
or blindness
whoa
calling that a fever
is pretty tough
yeah
somebody confused
yeah
one of the
man
so one of the other
you said treatments
that we're doing
one of the things
that I think is
the most exciting
thing that I have
come across
and I know
I think you know
where I'm going
with this
in my entire
time in healthcare
is the muse
stem cells
yeah
so I don't know
if you want me
to talk a little bit
about that
so for the listeners
because of you
candidly
I get approached
all the time
from scientists
from doctors
from people going
hey I've got this
thing that's going
to change the world
and I'm like
sure you do
and you just
never know
so I had a company
reach out
and they're like
hey we would love
to meet with you
we have a
sub-phenotype
of stem cell
that we think
is going to
change the world
and so I call
Dr. White
you know
who's my
chief science officer
and I have him
vet these folks
and he's like
man I don't know
it sounds too good
to be true
they're like
we would love
for you guys
to fly to Japan
meet with Mari
does wanna
and hear her lectures
and tour the lab
and kind of see
what she's been doing
since 2010
we reviewed all the research
all the data
all the literature
and it was mind boggling
so Ian and I hopped on a plane
and went to Japan
back in September
and sat down with Mari
and she was gracious enough
to break down
all of her research
answer Ian's questions
and I'm gonna be clear
like we went there
to debunk this shit
we thought there's no way
that this is what
she's presenting
it's just
it just seems
too good to be true
and after sitting
through those lectures
and Mari
enlightening us
on all of her research
and what she's seen
I left there with Ian
and he looked at me
and was like
this
if this is real
this is going to change
everything
in the regenerative space
and Ian I think
won regenerative scientist
of the year
last year
in North America
he won some
a big award
for this space
and Ian
is a stem cell scientist
and
but these Muse
stem cells
are such a rare
subset phenotype
of stem cell
and so
the best way
to explain it is
to try and break it down
in like layman's terms
is Muse
stands for
multi-lineage
and
the SE
of Muse
stands for
stress
enduring
so
what does that mean
in like real world talk
Mari in her book
where she writes about
these cells
and how she discovered them
she was in the lab
she had
she kept coming across
this small
outlier subset
of stem cells
that appeared to have
a lot of unique qualities
but they were less than
2% of stem cells
so
stem cells
that are already
a very minute amount
of the cells in our body
have a subset phenotype
called Muse
she had to rush out
to a dinner
where in Japan
where she ended up
eating sushi
and having sake
and forgot
to put the cells
back
take them off
the petri dish
and put them back
in cryopreserve
she thought she'd go in
the next day
and everything would be dead
when she went in
because the cells
don't last overnight
she goes in the next day
and to her surprise
all of those subset
phenotype of cells
were still alive
a large majority
of them were still alive
and she thought
that can't be possible
and that was in 2010
and that's what began
her research
into what are Muse
and so
without getting
too in the weeds
I'd love to like
break down
what it is
what makes it unique
and why it's so promising
if you're game
because it's super cool
first and foremost
in medicine
they say
do no harm
right
and so
when we're lobbying
and trying to educate
these politicians
and these regulators
on the safety profile
of traditional MSCs
traditional stem cells
are extremely safe
and I've said this
on your podcast before
Dr. Kaplan
who discovered
traditional MSCs
in an open letter
to the scientific community
apologized
and said
I should have never
called them stem cells
because the problem
with these cells
is they don't differentiate
they don't become anything
that only happens
in a petri dish
but in the body
they just signal
to damage
and then they transfer
their mitochondria
and they temporarily
give your body
an environment
to heal faster
and to recover
so they aren't
truly regenerative
in that they don't
become a tendon
they don't become
a neuron
and there's pros
and cons to that
the pros are
they don't become
a cancer cell
and that's the
concern
with pluripotency
and so the holy grail
of what people
have always looked for
with stem cells
were could we
for lack of a better term
fuck with these cells
enough in a petri dish
to create pluripotency
where they can
become something
but prevent
tumorigenic behavior
where they don't
become a tumor
or don't become
a cancer
lo and behold
in 2010
what Mari discovered
was this ultra resilient
subset of stem cell
that holds
those exact traits
it was in us
all along
it's always been in us
this wasn't created
in a petri dish
this is biology
this is the
stem cell answer
that has eluded
scientists
for decades
and it is so exciting
because the multi-lineage
what does that mean
multi-lineage
just means
these are pluripotent cells
pluripotent multi-lineage
is a bunch of
fancy science talk
for they can become
anything
so the way I explain
that is
you and I talked
about this years ago
orthopedic surgeons
would go
you know I use
bone marrow stem cells
and I don't really
get good results
and I think that
you can't get
real stem cells
because those cells
have an identity
and when you take
bone marrow
the cells have already
become a bone marrow cell
and they're not going
to differentiate
and become something
so heretofore
they can't heal
there's some truth to that
they couldn't
they could just
help regenerate
or help
I guess
optimize your body's healing
through bringing down
inflammation
and potentially
transferring mitochondria
into your old
tired weary cell
cells
where these cells
are fundamentally
different
is think of it
like a kindergartner
a kindergartner
can be anything
the world is that
child's oyster
if they want to grow up
and be a doctor
they can be a doctor
if they want to grow up
and be an astronaut
they can be an astronaut
the traditional cells
that doctors
and clinicians
have been using
in America
they're already grown up
they've already chose
their identity
they already went
to med school
and they decided
they're a doctor
you can't put those
in the body
and have them
become something
because they've already
developed their identity
their phenotype
these cells
will literally
go into the body
and take on
the phenotype
of any damaged cell
what is so amazing
and crucial about that
to understand is
if they come across
a torn tendon cell
they become that tendon cell
if it's a bone marrow cell
they become a bone marrow
if it's a neuron
they can become a neuron
and the process
that they do it through
is also pretty fascinating
it's a commonly known process
but phagocytosis
don't say it three times fast
it can get cancelled
but like
phagocytosis
essentially
and even in that layman's term
is like
think of it like a pac-man
this is how Mari described it to me
because she knows I'm an idiot
and she's like trying to break it down
in a way I can digest
she's like
I want you to think of a pac-man
think of a damaged cell
like a neuron
this pac-man is going to go up
gobble up that neuron
through the process of phagocytosis
and take on
all of the characteristics
and code
of that
cell
meaning
it will become
a young
healthy
version
of the damaged cell
so
one
these cells
are extremely safe
in that
they're non-tumorgenic
in studies
these cells
had
no
never became tumors
in any of the studies
that are ever done
furthermore
they treated mice
that had pre-existing cancer
they did not only
not exasperate
the tumors
in many of the studies
the tumors shrunk
and I'm not here to say like
it's going to cure cancer
or anything like that
the message is
traditional MSCs
are already extremely safe
and these MSCs
appear to be
even
as safe
if not more safe
and the only
knock on traditional MSCs
in real world application
when utilized appropriately
is
they have an
immunomodulatory
modulatory
immuno
immunity response
essentially where
10 to 15% of people
will get flu-like symptoms
and that's with traditional MSCs
which is a very low
safety profile
what you saw
like effective safety profile
what you saw
with the muse cells
in trials
is 0%
literally right now
nobody's even getting
flu-like symptoms
and it's because
these muse cells
go above and beyond
immuno
like the ability to
navigate your immune system
and go into
immunomodulating
your immune system
so what do I mean by that?
Mari did a study
where she took mice
sutured in human livers
into the mice's liver
the mice should reject that
and die
they implant
mu cells in
and the liver
will accept
the human liver
for a period of time
they eventually
rejected the liver
but it's able
to immunomodulate
so think about this
for
a simple way
to explain it
is the whole process
I broke down before
like when a mother's pregnant
that baby
is technically
a foreign body
in the mother
so what in science
stops that mother's body
from rejecting
and killing the baby
and her immune system
attacking the baby
the answer
is MSCs
the answer is
the juices of life
that allow that
mother's system
to immunomodulate
and not turn on the baby
so not only does it
build up the mom's immune system
and helps the mom
reduce inflammation
reduce
like her risk of
chronic disease
and all mortality cause
is at an all-time low
while pregnant
the risk of cancer
is at an all-time low
while pregnant
all of this goes back
to MSCs
and now we believe
potentially muse cells
and so
they're safe
they're non-tumorgenic
they immunomodulate
meaning your body's
not going to reject
these cells
you're not going to
have a huge risk
what's crazy
is they're already
using it in plastic surgery
this is what I was talking
they would take
historically
instead of
women were using fillers
and the reason
they used fillers
instead of fat
is fat lacks angiogenesis
and those fat cells die
and a lot of times
the success rate's
not as high
so what they're doing
in Dubai
and these other nations
is they're using muse
when they do
a reconstructive surgery
to reduce the risk
that you have
an immune response
that rejects
the fat tissue
so it encourages
the body
to accept that tissue
and then helps
those cells
build themselves
back into your system
and immunoregulate
so think about it
for the future
of like organ transplants
what this could mean
if the science holds
in practice
of what they're seeing
but for the sake
of conversation today
the point of saying
all that is
extremely safe
no risk of tumors
non-tumorgenic
immunomodulating
meaning your body's
not going to turn on it
it's not going to cause
any sort of
inflammatory response
or flu-like symptoms
so one of the safest
versions of stem cells
we've ever seen
and the traditional cells
are extremely safe
themselves
and then you get
into the pluripotency
I mean this is
the first cell
other than the cells
that have been altered
that can truly
become something
and then the fourth
and final thing
that's really amazing
about these cells
is their honing abilities
so traditional MSCs
what we've been using
at WasteWell
for the last five years
even with the great success
we've had
they literally have
a 3 to 5%
engraftment rate
meaning 3 to 5%
of those cells
make it to the site
of damage
and begin the healing process
in the site of damage
and think about the results
we've gotten
now look at Muse
Muse have a 15 to 30%
engraftment rate
Muse are literally
half the size
of traditional MSCs
and they have the ability
when administered
intravenously
to pass the lungs
and make it to the site
of inflammation
and damage
they hone in
at a much stronger rate
than traditional MSCs
so the way to think of it
is like
you're taking
a heat-seeking missile
that's able to find
exactly where the
S1P
S1 inflammation
damaged cell
is the signal
that a cell sends out
hey I'm damaged
these Muse cells
will navigate
straight to those
damaged cells
through phagocytosis
absorb that cell
take on its phenotype
and be a young
healthy vibrant
version of that cell
and all of this
occurs within three days
so that's why
you're seeing
such crazy results
in Dubai
and overseas
and these are the
treatments that are
coming into the U.S.
that are going to be
manufactured here
on U.S. soil
and utilized
in states right now
like Florida
Texas
Arizona
and the states
that have built
pathways that make
this approachable
for people
the hope is
that we can build
a regulatory pathway
at the federal level
that will allow
accessibility too
because
what is definitively
clear is these
treatments
even the old MSCs
and purified amnion
and Wharton's jelly
and all those things
there's no arguing
that they're extremely safe
I mean there's 30
40 years of data
on these products
they are safe
they are available
in nature
they occur naturally
the question is
how efficacious are they
what disease states
can they help with
and how much
can they move the needle
and that's where
this gets tricky
because the FDA
doesn't want people
out there making claims
and I understand that
because there's so many
people who are
snake oil salesmen
and my thing is
I'm not here to make
a claim
I'm just here to say
accessibility is important
because for the people
who don't have
any more lifeline left
who knows what this
could do for them
for the patients
you know
battling some sort
of neurocognitive issue
you know
these cells are able
to pierce into the midbrain
I mean
and I have all these
Jamie
a bunch of these studies
I have listed on
Ways to Well's website
just so I'm not
throwing random stuff
out there
I think I listed
seven or eight
of Mari Dazawa's
studies
that back
everything that I'm saying
but the premise is
you know
the future's bright
and I think that
Muse will be
an integral part
of what we see
here in the United States
in the future
of biologics
when we're talking
about genes
these obviously
are in the body
these cells
is it
is there a potential future
where they could just
turn these things on
and not have to add
exogenous
stem cells
so here's
the problem is
you have a precipitous
decline as you age
right
and so just like
what we're seeing
with peptides
you have a certain
amount of these
and as you age
they appear to decline
the other thing
that this is a crazy
so you've got
this scientist
Dr. Dominic Deutscher
out of Germany
brilliant guy
Stanford trained
went to Stanford
did research at Stanford
went to Harvard
University of Munich
crazy background
14 years of stem cell research
he catches wind
of what Mari's doing
and he had been
working on a study
going there appears
to be
this weird subset
of stem cells
that I can't figure out
what they're doing
but they're not there
in diabetic patients
when I look at patients
that are diabetic
they don't have
this subset
so what is this subset
and what is it doing
but he couldn't figure it out
he was on the cusp
of figuring it out
and then he meets Mari
and goes
oh my god
you literally figured out
what the fuck
I've been trying to solve
for the last 14 years
the reason is
these patients are diabetic
and their system
is so chronically riddled
with inflammation
and all these issues
the environment
or whatever it is
their lifestyle
caused the decline
and basically
the end of these cells
all their ability to heal
was used up
is that part of the reason
other than just blood flow
and the other challenges
of diabetics
it could be
one of the under
under causing
attributes
that are causing
these diabetic patients
to heal poorly
to be chronically inflamed
so it could be part
of that equation
but what's fascinating
is it also declines
as we age
so you're going to see
way more of these
at birth
way less of these
in your 30s
probably non-existent
by the time you're
in your 40s and 50s
and so if we can
take these cells
these goodies of life
and we can administer
them proactively
and preventatively
they even did
mitochondrial testing
I don't know if that
study is released yet
if it is I'll add it
to the website
I'll find out from Mari
but they did a
mitochondrial function test
one IV bag administration
took one and a half years
off the mitochondrial age
whoa
and so I'm not saying
that it reverses aging
but in these studies
it appears to have
extreme mitochondrial
benefits
which would
logic to reason
as to why
we're seeing such
phenomenal results
with these treatments
and where even
and I'm still a huge
proponent of all
of the traditional
stuff we've been using
we've seen miraculous
results
with all of these
different modalities
but I look at Muse
and go
this is the holy grail
of what we've been
trying to find
and Mari did it
like she found it
she discovered it
in 2010
they started using it
in human patients
in 2019
these products
are being used
every day
in Dubai
and overseas
people are flying
over there
and paying
boo-koo dollars
to these clinics
to get treatments
with Muse cells
in fact
one of the sheiks
of United Arab Emirates
or one of those
his son got in a car wreck
he literally was
in the hospital
they
this is a true story
they said
he's done
pull the plug
harvest his organs
Dominic
was able to get
a hold of the hospital
the German scientist
and say
hold on
can you guys
do a call
with Mari
I may have a solution
they treated
a kid who had been
comatose
non-responsive
take his organs
like he's done
the neurologists
are like he's done
there is no brain
here anymore
they treat this kid
with intravenous
Muse cells
and his brain
function has come back
he's not talking
but he's responding
to his mother
he's moving his hands
they're no longer
looking to harvest
his organs
and this is a
catastrophic example
but in a more
real world
relevant example
is in Japan
they used it
with children
who were born
with encephalitis
and what they saw
is
these children
who are left
untreated
will definitively
have
neurocognitive
issues
and defects
mental retardation
the children
treated with Muse
within 8 days
of birth
all of those
children had
normal brain function
all of them
and so
the studies
beyond that
and then you get
into
what they saw
in hearts
what they saw
in myocardial
infarctions
like you just
go down the list
and there's so
much promising data
and there's
a decade
worth of it
it just
hasn't made it
into the US
yet
and these
are technologies
and science
and modalities
that are
going to be
adopted
in the near future
at minimal
at the state level
and then hopefully
at the federal level
because
they're already
looking
we know
like I said
Secretary Kennedy
is looking to
open the regulatory
pathway
for stem cells
and mu's
are just a subset
of that same class
but an even safer
more efficacious
version from what
we're seeing
in all of the trials
and what's so exciting
is that
as more research
develops
more of these things
are going to emerge
yep
they're going to keep
the gene therapies
mu's cells
it's going to continue
to compound
well and then you've got
guys like Ryan
who go
if you could take
a mu's cell
and a cell
that could be anything
right
and it already has
it's ready to learn
what if you can
take a mu's cell
and you can teach it
to be exactly
what you want it to be
and then you administer
that cell into the body
but you've already
given it its commands
you've already taught it
that it wants to be
a doctor
right
it wants to be
whatever it is
maybe you make sure
that it's a neuron
again I'm way over
my skis on this part
because I'm a business guy
I'm just breaking down
what these scientists
are saying
and all of it
is exciting
and promising
to me
because again
we've had such
phenomenal results
with traditional
MSCs
you know
with traditional
and all mu's are
are this subset
phenotype
of super soldier cell
they're more resilient
so the second part
of mu's is
stress enduring
so what the whole point
is Mari has a chapter
in her book
called
sake and science
because
through drinking sake
she realized
that there was
an element
of the science
behind this
that she would
have never uncovered
had she not gone
to that dinner
she would have
never realized
that these cells
appear to be
ultra resilient
they can ship
these cells
at room temperature
and they're viable
for weeks
whereas traditional
cells
we've got to keep
cryopreserved
and ship on dry ice
so from an administration
standpoint
from a logistical
standpoint
from an efficacy
standpoint
from a safety
standpoint
all of this
could be so
game changer
so then the next
question just becomes
how do we build
a regulatory pathway
in this country
that allows
accessibility
so that Americans
aren't having to go
to other nations
and the states
some of the states
are doing it
but ideally
it would be optimal
to work
with the federal government
to build those
same pathways
at the federal level
now that the states
have already jumped
on board
god that's so fascinating
such a cool time
dude it's awesome
I'm telling you
and the stuff
it's hard because
again I'm not a clinician
I don't ever
I'm not
I don't want to make claims
I don't want it to be
I am very excited
about this
but I want to temper
my excitement
because I have to be
cautious to say
I don't want to give
people false hope
you know
we don't know
the science is very early
but it is very promising
on a lot of different things
and we've already had
immense success
on orthopedic injuries
knees, shoulders, elbows
using traditional MSCs
that can't differentiate
right
they're just transferring
mitochondria
and temporarily
putting your body
in a position to heal
these mu cells
differentiate
so they literally
are regenerative cells
that become the broken cell
that allow your body
to heal
I mean
and what we do with that
and what the future holds
with that
the sky's the limit
wow
that's amazing
and that's where I just think
eventually we're going to get
to a point where it's like
did we really prescribe
everyone petrochemical drugs
to fix problems
because the genetic side
of the world
and the stem cell side
of the world
and the biologic side
of the world
and all of these things
and then you break in
the large language model side
and wearables
and the ability
to track in real time
but also this is where
you're going to find
the resistance
because there's so much
money in the petrochemical drugs
yeah
and this is what's challenging
with the stem cell stuff
like if they don't work
people are not going to spend
their hard-earned paycheck
right
and that's the challenge
like I understand
the FDA stance
on safety
and again
the historic FDA stance
on not even this new administration
this new administration
has made it clear
their plan is
to open up
the regulatory pathways
on peptides
and stem cells
and cash pay products
and to figure out a pathway
that makes sense
for the American people
while still honoring
the safety and integrity
of what they're trying
to implement
on a grander scale
but do we need
to go through
the level
of rigorous
you know
multi-billion dollar
process on something
that can't really
be patented
or if it's safe
and the safety profile
is proven
and it's readily available
in nature
does it make sense
to grandfather
these treatments in
and to allow patients
compassionate use
right
if you're battling
a chronic disease
and you're going to die
what is the harm
in seeing if this can help
if you're battling dementia
or Alzheimer's
you know
that's another huge one
like traditional MSCs
are too big
to pass the blood-brain barrier
MUSE MSCs
can be internasally administered
and immediately go into
the blood-brain barrier
and in trials
they were able to see
the MUSE cells
18 months later
lit up like a Christmas tree
in the midbrain
the reason that's important
is midbrain
is where Parkinson's
and so many of these
neurocognitive disease states
reside
and where most of the
dysfunction is occurring
and so
yeah
there's a lot of promise
I'm excited about it
I think MUSE
are going to be
a big opportunity
here in America
to drive meaningful change
it's just a matter of
you know
when and how
they're available
and to what capacity
you're going to see
these things
springing up
at the state level
they're already happening
all over
outside the United States
it's just a little bit
different market here
with the regulatory landscape
well that's what's so frustrating
is that they are being utilized
effectively overseas
yeah
and you think about
how many people
do have people
that are in the hospital
do have chronic illness
do have these problems
that could be fixed here
yeah
and like
let's get it going guys
yeah
yeah
I'm telling you man
like it's
such an exciting time
it's super exciting
yeah
it's super exciting
and hopefully it's not too boring
for the listeners
it's just
it's complicated stuff
so I want to try to break it down
it's not boring at all man
don't apologize
is there anything else
you want to cover
no
the other is just
you said some of the treatments
you know
one of the ones that
I heard Dana White talk about
and he had said
well you got to go to Mexico
is plasmapheresis
like we have plasmapheresis
here in Austin, Texas
we use it
we added it to the clinic
I guess three months ago
plasmapheresis
is also known as
therapeutic plasma exchange
essentially we run your blood
through a dialysis machine
it's been used for over 50 years
it's used at the Mayo Clinic
it's used at all of these
various academic institutions
it just hasn't been used
for longevity
right
and in an insurance model
where you're trying to get
a reimbursement rate
you've got to have an indication
but in a cash pay model
and this is where the world
is your oyster
in a cash pay model
a clinician
and you the patient
can make a decision
that you want to get
proactive and predictive
and you want to
run your body
your blood
through a plasmapheresis machine
and basically isolate out
within the plasma itself
the liquid
are all the inflammatory markers
all the leftover
bad stuff
that you don't want
in your blood
so for me
as a 45 year old male
I've got 45 years
of all the attrition
and stuff that's in my system
you get 70% of that out
through one therapeutic
plasma exchange
utilizing the plasmapheresis machine
and so what we'll do is
we'll extrapolate out
systematically your plasma
and replace it with
young healthy protein
called albumin
and then where we go
an additional step
at WasteWell
is we're developing
a protocol
where we also add in
the MSCs
and peptides
and all of the things
that are missing
from albumin
right
so there's two different
train of thoughts
and I have these listed too
Jamie on the website
there's a bunch
of different studies
plasmapheresis has been studied
for over 50 years
it's just not been utilized
for like longevity
and preventative care
it's used more
for systematic
inflammatory issues
there's even a bunch
of fascinating studies
around Alzheimer's
because Alzheimer's
and dementia
is so inflammatory related
so there's a bunch
of fascinating stuff
on that
but the premise
of plasmapheresis
is think of it
like an oil change
for your body
we're going to take out
70% of all the bad stuff
that's floating around
in your blood
we're going to replace
that blood
with young healthy albumin
and then you know
what we're attempting
to do is stack it
with our own protocol
where we add in MSCs
extracellular vesicles
all of these cellular goodies
that are readily available
at birth
that have a precipitous
decline as we age
what is this
can serial therapy
lower right corner
plasma exchange
remove synthetic chemicals
from humans
so is this like BPCs
and that kind of shit
what it's yeah
what it's doing is
it's the goal
is to remove
all the extra stuff
that's in your system
that you don't need
and this study
is pretty interesting
because it breaks down
what they saw
here's a real world example
our mutual friend
Philip Franklin Lee
and I asked him
if I can talk about this
look at this
compounds such as
bisphenol
plasticizers
and phthalates
yep
endocrine disruptors
that are associated
with the intake
of ultra processed foods
due to
at least in part
to their packaging material
so this is the stuff
that Dr. Shanna Swans
talked about
that are endocrine disruptors
endocrine disruptors
so crazy
Philip
and he's talked about
this on his podcast
Philip came in
chronically tired
super low testosterone
I think
I can't remember
the exact number
he talked about
on his podcast
but he was shocked
how low his testosterone
it was like 80 or 90
it was really really low
we did a microplastics test
and he had the most
freaking microplastics
that we've ever seen
well he eats all that sushi
and it's always wrapped
in plastic
I know
and so we ran that test
and then it was
through the roof
and it scared him
and Philip
stopped drinking out
of plastic bottles
took a very like
measured approach
to trying to be aware
of how much plastic
he could inadvertently
be consuming
and then we ran him
through ways
to well protocols
not only
can we quantify it
through his testing
which I think he posted
on his Instagram
we quantified
how much we reduced
the level of microplastics
philip's testosterone
without being on
any testosterone
is at 1200
whoa
all of that inflammation
and shit
that was in his system
was causing
chronic inflammation
chronic fatigue
running down
his immune system
and causing
all of these
cascade effects
that led to him
essentially having
a low testosterone
how many people
out there
are having
a shitload
that's what it's like
like so many people
come in and go
what do you have
that can help me
and this is what's
challenging too
this is another thing
I want to point out
about the challenge
of like
not making claims
or understanding
the nuance
we saw this
with the psychedelic
attempt to get
psychedelics
through the FDA
one of the things
that they wanted
to do in the
psychedelic trials
was provide
psychiatric
what's the
integration
so you come out
the other end
of a mushroom journey
and you talk
to a therapist
and you walk
through
what you experience
to process
your thoughts
and emotions
the system's
not built
to do that
because now
you're taking
two different things
and attempting
to build a
bill master code
and get an indication
well if I'm united
I'm going to go
well how do I know
it wasn't just
the therapy
or maybe it was
just the mushrooms
why am I paying
the therapist
and so that's
one of the challenges
when people go
what do you have
for microplastics
what's tough
is a lot of people
come in
and they go
hey man
I'm going to do
the hockett
and I'm going to do
the plasmapheresis
and I want to do
MSCs
and I want you
to bring down
my inflammation
and so so many people
are doing
multiple modalities
what I'm saying
is it's working
but which one
is the needle mover
or is it an attrition
of all of them
you know
that's where this
gets tough
and that's where
I want to track
and do a better job
of like tracking
and quantifying
individuals
who just do one test
or one treatment
or one aspect
of what we're doing
at Weighs2Well
which one's moving
the needle the most
because so many people
want to try everything
right they're already here
they already flew in
so they're like
yeah let me do this today
this tomorrow
this and then they all
report back
I'm feeling phenomenal
I feel the best I've felt
but they did five things
so I don't know
which one
was the one
does it matter
as long as it's
providing a benefit
it's good to know
but yeah
listen man
thank you so much
for everything
I'm so happy
you're out there
and this is so exciting
all this stuff
is so exciting
and I'm glad
we have another opportunity
to talk to people
about this shit
because it's really
impactful
you're the man
and if you wouldn't
have had me on here
to talk about this
I wouldn't have got
to meet Secretary Kennedy
and we wouldn't
be in a position
and I will tell you
not being hyperbolic
if you weren't here
and fighting
for peptides
and accessibility
and you hadn't
given me a platform
I don't know
if anybody
would be
helping this administration
navigate all this
I really don't
there's so many people
on the opposite side
of the aisle
that it's a tough
thing to navigate
and it takes
somebody who knows
and has been in the industry
enough to explain it
hopefully in a way
that resonates
where we can get
things done
but we'll see
well it's exciting
yeah
thank you man
thanks brother
appreciate you
bye everybody