Listen to my latest podcast episode:

TMHS 437: Buying Science, Healthwashing Labels, & Sparking Real Change - With Guest Vani Hari

TMHS 433: The Masking Of Studies & Conflicts On Airborne Transmission Of SARS-CoV-2

The mask debate has become highly politicized and fueled by emotion. But instead, what if we approached life with logic, science, and reason? On this episode of the Model Health Show, my mission is to provide you with the tools you need to evaluate scientific studies and prepare yourself to shut down the cognitive biases that we all hold. 

We’re digging into the studies on mask efficacy, preventing infection, and health outcomes in the US. You’ll learn about different types of masks and how they perform in scientific studies, plus how to actually understand the results of the data. This episode also contains real ways you can protect your family and your community during a public health crisis. 

I hope this information inspires you to always approach life with a sense of curiosity and to stand up for logic and rationality. Most importantly, I hope this episode encourages you to put your time and energy toward real solutions that contribute to your health, as well as the health of those around you. 

In this episode you'll discover:

  • The behaviors and activities your genes expect you to participate in. 
  • What the number one risk factor for having a severe reaction to COVID-19 is.
  • How our cognitive biases can stop us from being logical. 
  • What happens when an infected person coughs into a petri dish while wearing a mask. 
  • How a randomized control trial works. 
  • Data on the efficacy of a mask for preventing illness. 
  • The importance of thorough handwashing for preventing infections. 
  • How many Americans are obese or overweight. 
  • The top three causes of death in the United States. 
  • How cloth masks can actually increase the risks of infection. 
  • Tangible ways to help improve the health of those around you.
  • The power of having curiosity. 

Items mentioned in this episode include:

Thank you so much for checking out this episode of The Model Health Show. If you haven’t done so already, please take a minute and leave a quick rating and review of the show on Apple Podcast by clicking on the link below. It will help us to keep delivering life-changing information for you every week!

Transcript:

Shawn Stevenson: Welcome to the Model Health Show. This is fitness and nutrition expert Shawn Stevenson, and I'm so grateful for you tuning in with me today. This is a very special episode. It's a bonus episode of the Model Health Show, and today's episode wasn't even going to come out as a podcast. This was a video-only, exclusive content. This was published on YouTube, all the social media channels, and it went crazy out there, but I want to make sure that we put it here on this platform as well. But listen, I still want to highly encourage you to check out the video of this as well. It's a stand-alone video. It doesn't have this part of it where I'm talking with you here on the podcast platform, but go and check out the video so that you can actually go with me step by step and see the studies there because there's this statement that seeing is believing.

Seeing is believing. We need to see some of this stuff with our own two eyes. But even that isn't enough, because there's another part of that statement that's often overlooked, and it's that seeing is believing, but feeling is the truth. Seeing is believing, but feeling is the truth, and we have to be able to tune in to that inner guidance system and how things feel. Does something feel right? And we can actually... Unfortunately today there's so much distraction. We can argue with ourselves about our feelings. And it's understandable though, today. There's a lot going on in the world, there's a lot of tension, there's a lot of people infighting about issues, and ultimately we want the same thing. We want people to be healthy. We want lives to be saved. Not just that, we want lives to be improved. And how we go about that, there's a debate going on, but I know at my core, and I think that you feel the same way, that the most important thing that we do is to do the things that actually contribute to a real, healthy, sovereign human being. All the things that our genes expect us to do. Movement, nutrition, great sleep, connection, relationships, sunlight, fresh air, all these things that... These are the ingredients that create health, and in our society today, these things have been widely skewed.

Some of the most dominant voices in nutrition are fast-food companies. Some of the most dominant voices in nutrition are these mega-processed food entities that also have a big bearing on political factors as well, lobbyists. And this whole system that we are experiencing right now needs to change. And so the action steps to get us there are debatable, but the fact that we need to get there, not debatable. And you should feel that in your spirit. And so today, again, I want to encourage you to check out the video version so you can walk with me through the studies and see them with your own two eyes, but also be able to tap into your feelings, get reconnected to that, so that you get that visceral experience of the thing that we need to do and also to cut through all of the misinformation that's out there and see things clearly. It's difficult right now to be logical in many instances because when we're stressed, when we're fearful, even for you, probably for people that you know and respect, and friends of yours or family members who, again, they're good people, but maybe they just don't want to listen. More than ever, they're just arguing about things that are simply not based on reality, and you're just like, "Why? Why won't you listen?"

When we are uncertain, when we are in fear when our lives have been changed so much like they have been, we're operating in a different part of our brain. It's called an amygdala hijack. The more primitive parts of our brains are taking over, and everything is so much more emotionalized, and we tie that with our feelings. Our feelings and emotions, it's not necessarily the same things, by the way, and these are things that we can actually consciously help to shift as well. But what we don't want to do is use our emotion to then inspire our executive brain to make up, "logical" explanations for things that are illogical. And you probably have seen that happen a little bit, so I want to implore all of us to reel it in a bit and really be able to sit with these things and look at things from multiple perspectives so that we can paint a very important picture right now, because the things that we're doing right now, the steps that we're making right now, are going to affect human behavior, human connection, and human health from here on out. This is the time, right now, 2020, this is the time that we're determining how the story's going to go.

Because in truth, at the very beginning of this situation, my intention was to find out which masks actually work best, and for which people, for children, for folks who have different medical conditions. Those were the things that I was thinking. I was looking through that lens. I was also looking at what are the most effective types of masks, and how do we employ this new practice without venturing into the ridiculous. And yet here we are, and just a couple of days ago, it was 111 degrees outside here in my neighborhood, and I'm walking down the street and I see my neighbor walk from their house 20 feet to their car, that's the only distance, wearing a full-on gas mask, head-to-toe clothing, and gloves in 111-degree weather.

Is that really necessary? Is that smart? Is it potentially causing him harm or not just physical harm, but what about psychologically? What's going on mentally for him to believe that that is the right thing to do, to get dressed in head-to-toe gear and a gas mask outside? Nobody's around in a 111-degree weather. Where is the line? Where do we actually do this in an intelligent way that we don't lose our humanity and we don't do things that are actually doing more harm than good? What does the data show? We've got plenty of it. And that's what we're going to be diving into today. And again, I implore you to check out the video as well. Seeing is believing. Seeing is believing, but feeling is the truth. Now, before we get into it, every day since this quarantine began, I've had the good fortune of not being on the road as much. And so I've had easy access to all of my favorite things and every day, I'm making my wife and I our favorite beverage to start our day. And this always includes our MCT oil, emulsified MCT oil. A randomized double-blind study published in the International Journal of Obesity and Related Metabolic Disorders had participants on a reduced-calorie diet check that included either supplemental MCTs, medium-chain triglycerides, or supplemental long-chain triglycerides or LCTs. It sounds like Snoop Dogg, LCT, LBC.

After the data was compiled, it was revealed that the group who included MCT oil lost more weight, eliminated more body fat, and experienced higher levels of satiety, the same reduced-calorie diet. How? How? What happened with their metabolism that they were able to actually lose more weight and specifically not just lose weight, but lose more body fat? There's something special there. And this is why, yet another reason, I'm a huge fan of the emulsified MCT oil from Onnit. It tastes amazing. Great to add to your hot beverages, tea, coffee. You can add it to cold beverages as well, add it to smoothies. I think it's phenomenal. It tastes amazing and you get these incredible benefits, very few things have benefits like this. There's something special about that. The human body really does vibe very well with the medium-chain triglycerides. Pop over to onnit.com/model. That's O-N-N-I-T.com/model. You get 10% off the MCT oil and everything else they carry. My favorite is the almond milk latte flavor. My wife loves the vanilla. Pop over there, pick out which one you want to try, and get yourself some Onnit Emulsified MCT Oil. I think you're going to love it. And on that note, let's get to the Apple Podcast review of the week.

iTunes Review: Another five-star review titled “Super Health Information” by Gamenfunpenguin. “Thank you, Shawn, for the amazing show and research you do. Appreciate your passion and analyses. You bring so much hope and light to uplift health for everyone. Radiant energy and vibrant health.”

Shawn Stevenson: Alright. Thank you so much for leaving me that review over on Apple Podcast. Shout out to Gamenfunpenguin, I appreciate that so much. And if you have yet to do so, please pop over to Apple Podcast and leave a review for the show. It means everything. And without further ado, now, we're going to get into this very special episode. And again, this was done exclusively for the video platform, but I wanted to provide it for you here as well, but definitely pop over and check out the video after you listen to this. And you can check out the video at themodelhealthshow.com/maskfacts. And again, buckle your seatbelt. Be ready to take some good notes. And right now, we're going to dive into some of the most pertinent information, some of the most critical data in being able to evaluate the quality of studies, being able to make sense of all the different contradictions and read through the data and make sense of all this so we can take action to truly transform the health of ourselves, our families and our communities. Let's check it out.

Today, we're going to be covering some of the most important information about COVID-19 that you might not be hearing about. Now, as it stands, the Journal of the American Medical Association has already published data as many other outlets have, that the number one risk factor from having a severe reaction to SARS-CoV-2, ending up in the ICU or even passing away from this virus, the number one risk factor is having a pre-existing chronic disease, most notably obesity, type 2 diabetes, and hypertension. Now, with this said, we need to address those issues absolutely, but we want to stop the spread to protect those most vulnerable. And our main mandate to help to make that happen and what's really been debated is the use of face masks. So I really want to dive into the data to find out what are the best methods and uses for face masks to help to accomplish our goal of saving lives. And so I went into the data with a very open heart, open mind to find out what are the best uses, what are the best type of masks and how can we do this in a logical way without going into the ridiculous. And time and time again, I was faced with data that was just really counterintuitive and things that really didn't fit into the popular narrative. And I felt so compelled by the data that I put together an entire documentary and the documentary just took off.

About a million people have watched it already. And it's called Mask Facts. And so today, we're going to dive even deeper and I'm going to arm you with information and data points that might seem... That are a bit confusing and that people are debating about right now and also, to arm you against what's to come as more data is coming to be able to see the data, to read through things as a scientist, through the eyes of a scientist because I've got about 20 years of experience in working as a research scientist, but also 10 years clinical work. And I've just been passionate about this space. And this is a skill set that I think that we all need more than ever because the news headlines can be so confusing and they can also drive about a big seed of fear because that's what they're meant to do. We need to be able to read the data, learn the data so we can protect ourselves, protect our families, and protect our community at large.

And one of the first things that I wanted to do in the Mask Facts documentary looked at the boots on the ground data. What randomized controlled trials exist in community settings, not just in the surgical setting, that found that we can reduce the spread of viruses? And there were quite a few. And one of them is a randomized controlled control trial, again this is the upper echelon, the gold standard of clinical trials, this is a randomized controlled control trial. And this was published in the BMJ, the British Medical Journal, very prestigious, that looked at the efficacy of masks to prevent viral infection in hospital healthcare workers in 15 different hospitals.

The participants in the study were randomized into three different groups. One group was instructed to wear surgical masks for their entire work shift. Another group was instructed to wear cloth masks for their entire work shift. And then they had a third group, which was the control group who were allowed general practice, which included occasionally wearing a mask, intermittently wearing a mask, wearing different types of masks, or not wearing a mask at all. That was the control group. So they have three specific study groups in this randomized controlled trial. And here's what the study found. A percentage of health care workers in all groups contracted infections, but the participants wearing cloth masks had significantly higher rates of infections compared to the surgical mask group.

In fact, healthcare workers wearing cloth masks were 13 times more likely to experience a viral type infection than folks wearing the surgical/medical mask. 13 times more likely by wearing a cloth mask. Now right away when looking at this information, if we're not coming into this with a strong cognitive bias and ignoring the fact that this exists, we should at least be cautioning people against wearing cloth masks. At least, because it's found to be so much less effective. In fact in the study, the researchers noted that the penetration of cloth masks by virus particles was almost 97% penetration. That's a lot of penetration. Compared to the surgical mask, aka medical mask, having 44% penetration, still a lot of penetration. You’re 44% penetrated is still.

Now, the medical mask didn't do particularly well, but the performance of the cloth mask was absolutely horrendous. Shouldn't people know this? This exists. This information exists. We can't ignore that this exists. But instead, because we're carrying cognitive biases, and we want to try to find things wrong, we don't see the data. We miss things that are right in front of us. And what's said is that you don't see the world as it is, you see the world as you are. And being able to put our biases aside and look at the data with rationality and logic, and see how can we truly help people? This shouldn't be just mask and no mask, and everybody's in-fighting. How do we go about this with intelligence? Because this data exists.

Now there was something even more potentially shocking about the study, is that not only were the rates of infection higher in the cloth mask wearing group than the surgical mask wearing group, the rates of infection in the cloth mask group were significantly higher than the people in the control group, who are allowed to wear a mask of choice without strict compliance, and in some cases not wear a mask at all. But instead, there's going to be a small-minded minority of people like, "Well, you said there was a group who didn't wear a mask." No I didn't, no I didn't. Don't try to latch on to the minutiae. The study affirmed that this included a variety of things, there was no strict compliance with whether or not people should wear a mask or not, and sometimes people didn't. And that's in the study, it's there. Don't ignore the fact that it's there and miss the bigger point which is, cloth masks, as the study states, and this is directly from the researchers, they stated that there's enough data to conclude that the wearing of cloth masks can potentially increase your risk of getting sick.

What if you put something on your face that makes you more likely to get sick? Shouldn't people know that? We have the right to know this information. And the question is why? Why the cloth masks? Why would that happen? The researchers stated that, "Moisture retention and poor filtration may result in increased risk of infection with cloth masks, and that cloth masks should not be recommended." A cloth mask is potentially an even better environment for microbes to proliferate. It creates a wet trapped micro-habitat on our face, that makes our microbes colonize. And also, the... We are exposed to trillions upon trillions of microorganisms, bacteria, virus particles every single day, that wet environment makes it easier for them to stick to your mask. And also a study that was in the Mask Facts documentary found that, it makes it easier for viruses to pass in and out of the mask, by wearing a cloth mask for more than a short amount of time.

And some studies have somebody put on a mask for a couple of seconds, cough, take the mask off and they're like, "Well, see it works great." That's not how science works. That's not how things work in the real world. In the real world, what we have here are a randomized controlled trial in the real world. This exists. Says that a cloth mask is potentially dangerous to wear. Shouldn't we know this? At least to choose a different type of mask. Instead of companies making a butt load of money right now selling their cloth masks. Now, this study was conducted in 2015, before all of the politicized craziness that's happening right now. And due to that, a lot of people when the mandates started, were looking into the data. They were just trying to find logic and reasoning and rationale like, "Does this actually work? What type of masks work?" And people start bringing these things forward.

Shawn Stevenson: And because of the climate right now, the study authors added an updated note. Recently, they just added this note to the study. And what the note stated was essentially that, "We did find that cloth masks are stupid, but still wear one as a, "Last resort." They didn't say that their data was wrong, but they're trying to make it more politically correct and to say, "Don't not wear a mask," or "Don't not wear a cloth mask," last resort. So that's the world that we're living in right now. You need to be able to see that like, why would they suddenly say this... Their study was very clear. And now they're adding in this very vague note to their study. And so again, this was just one. I also looked at, and this was in the Mask Facts documentary, a meta-analysis of 19 randomized controlled trials, and this was published in the International Journal of Nursing Studies, and examined the effectiveness of masks in reducing infections in eight community settings, six healthcare settings, and five is source control, and the study concluded that "Medical masks were not effective and cloth masks even less effective." What the hell is less effective than not effective? 

What does that even mean? What it's concluding is that again, surgical slash medical masks were found to not be effective in 19 randomized controlled trials, this exists... The data exists, cloth masks were found to be even less effective than not effective, that data is there, which we're going to highlight, we're highlighting in this video, but unfortunately, people with a strong cognitive bias and are just addicted to missing the point, will miss on the results of the study, and instead looking at the political climate right now, they go down to the conclusion of the study, which states that the study suggests that community mask use by well people could be beneficial, particularly for COVID-19, where transmission may be pre-symptomatic. Could be? Could be? That's a lot softer of an assessment than the very firm statement that...

They made in the results of the study that said, "Medical masks were not effective," could be, not effective. Could be helpful, not effective. What? And cloth masks, even less effective than not effective. This exists. It exists. People need to know this. Alright, most rational human beings, they just want to know... They just want to know the truth. They just want to know what to do right now. And there's so much conflicting information. There's so much confusion. But there are certain people, smarty pants people. These were like, "No, that's wrong. The news is telling me, the health officials are telling me to wear something... Anything helps stop the spread." The real-world randomized controlled trials already gave us very sound information that we need to take into consideration, at least allow yourself to be a rational human being and at least take it into consideration, because again, even very intelligent people, the study results found that medical masks were not effective and cloth masks, even less effective, even intelligent people would just go right to the conclusion...

Well, the study says that they could be helpful and just completely miss the point, instead of getting the 90%, the 95, the 99% of the information that's viable, they latch on to the minutiae and ignore it as if it doesn't exist, but it exists. Now, the confusing part, of course, is that public health officials, organizations have actually recommended cloth masks. They're recommending cloth masks, even above medical masks in some instances based off of unrealistic studies where people put on a mask for a minute, cough into a petri dish, and then they're like, "See, this works great," but that's not how stuff works in the real world, people aren't just putting on a mask, coughing a few times, then taking the mask off, in fact, millions of people right now are wearing masks for hours upon hours every day. What do you think's going to happen? It's just creating more nastiness. This is easy stuff. But when you dig into the data and look at the effectiveness, you continue to see so much misinformation.

In fact, a popular article that has since recanted their original stance after countless people were using this to affirm how good cloth masks are... The article originally said, "A cloth mask offers more protection than a surgical mask for people nearby." They changed it, it doesn't exist the same way that it did, and because for myself, if you actually read the study that they used to have content like that out there on the internet, which this study that they use was published in the Annals of Internal Medicine, and it had patients with COVID-19 cough five times into a petri dish while using different types of masks to establish said effectiveness, they had them cough into the petri dish in this order, while wearing no mask, then while wearing a surgical mask, then while wearing a cloth mask, and then while wearing no mask again, and after compiling all the data, the study itself reported that, "Both surgical and cotton masks seemed to be ineffective in preventing the dissemination of SARS-CoV-2 from the coughs of patients with COVID-19."

Even more alarming in that study, the researchers noted and they were surprised to find that when test subjects coughed into the mask, even more, virus particles ended up on the outside of the mask than on the inside of the mask. Did they read this study before they put in their article saying how good cloth masks are? We see what we want to see. Now, this study was met with so much incredible resistance by the politicized medical community that the study authors, and again, this is a very prestigious journal The Annals of Internal Medicine, why would they publish this in the first place? It was met with so much resistance that they were forced to retract the study and say, "Well, well, maybe we were a little bit wrong," because you can't say that the mask was not effective. What's wrong with you? 

Don't you use no logic around here? You have to fit into the popular narrative. Not to say that they did the study perfectly, but this exists. And this actually mirrors the other studies that we've already covered, randomized controlled trials. Finding that "Hey, this actually doesn't work that well." So... But let's throw that one out, let's pretend that one doesn't exist. Let's pretend that whole thing didn't even happen. Yet another study. This was published in PLOS ONE. Public Library of Science One. It's set out to examine if the use of face masks and hand hygiene reduce rates of influenza-like illness and laboratory-confirmed influenza in the natural setting, in the natural world, in the world.

A cluster-randomized intervention was designed involving 1178 people. Participants were signed to either a face mask and hand hygiene group, a face mask only group, or a control group who weren't instructed to do anything specific during the study. Here's what the study found. The researcher stated that quote we observed a substantial 43% reduction in the incidence of influenza infection in the mask plus hand hygiene group compared to the control. But this estimate was not statistically significant. So it sounds decent like we got some benefit here, but listen to this. They said, "But there were no substantial reductions in influenza-like illness or laboratory-confirmed influenza in the face mask only group compared to the control." The handwashing appears to be effective. The face mask only, not effective. Study, after study, after study has found this.

We can't act like this doesn't exist. But instead of acknowledging the randomized controlled trials that demonstrate how ineffective these masks actually are, now all these different social media platforms, commercials, people out there on the inter-webs are propping up studies like what was published in The Lancet. In the study itself, and this is the big one that's going around right now. It was even tagged at the end of the YouTube videos where they're promoting how important it is for you to wear a mask right now. They referenced this study. This is the one. This is the golden child. Saying, "Okay, forget all the randomized controlled trials. We found something that affirms how effective these masks are." And if you read the study. It says, "Our search identified 172 observational studies across 16 countries and six continents with no randomized controlled trials.

And we'll get to this in a minute and 44 relevant comparative studies in healthcare and non-healthcare. Let me tell you what a comparative study is. So you're not like, "Oh, what about the comparative study?" A comparative study basically shows how something is the same or different from something else. It's incredibly vague and open to confusion, but what they really propped up here is 172 observational studies, and observational study by their nature are unreliable and unclear, and there is no specific intervention being employed, which leaves them open for massive biases. Whereas what we've been talking about thus far a randomized controlled trial is where researchers introduce a specific intervention in the study with specific effects. And it's also randomized, so it helps to eliminate biases. We really need to learn the difference here, 'cause I'm just shocked that health organizations, major entities, government entities are propping studies like this up and ignoring real randomized controlled trials in preference of studies like this.

So right off the bat, you're not comparing the apples of a randomized controlled trial to the oranges of an observational study. You're comparing apples to a mystery bag that might have an orange in it or it might be a flaming hot piece of dog shit. That's what's happening when we're comparing these two. And yet for people carrying a strong cognitive bias, and even a borderline religious belief that these masks are so effective, they're going to use these observational studies. They are going to stick their hand right in that bag, that mystery bag, and hold it out for everybody to see and not realize that there's a bunch of dog shit between their fingers. That's what they're doing with studies like this, and we have to be able to see the difference between the apples, the good, and the dog shit. And so that's what we're doing here today.

Now, for me, seeing that this is a compilation of observational studies versus the much more accurate randomized controlled trials that we've already covered, that end of itself is going to encourage me to pass on it, but I'll take you up on your seductive offer to check this out. You crazy mask worshipper you. Now guess who funded this study? The WHO. That's fascinating. Now, right off the bat in the introduction to the study they highlighted a major contradiction within their own study. Stating that SARS-CoV-2 spreads person-to-person through close contact and causes COVID-19. It has not been solved if SARS-CoV-2 might spread through aerosols from respiratory droplets. So far, air sampling has found virus RNA in some studies, but not in others. I thought this was clear. I thought this was spread through the airborne transmission. They're saying right here, there's conflicting information. Matter of fact, they have more studies affirming that it's not what we thought.

So I'm going to share with you a couple of the references here. Reference number two, and you can follow right along and go check this out for yourself. This was published in Emerging Infectious Diseases if you click on reference two. In COVID-19 patients rooms there was COVID everywhere. On the floors, computer mice, trash cans, hand rails, the air. Now, when the air was tested around COVID patients, here's what they noted. When they tested the actual air in isolation wards of confirmed COVID patients in the ICU and general wards and obtained positive results for 35% of the air samples in the ICU and only 12.5% of air samples from COVID patients in the general ward.

Now, this wasn't particularly high, but it's something. This for me is the affirmation, like, okay, yeah, it's airborne, they've got some data affirming this, but more so, what this study demonstrated is that you are much more likely to find COVID particles on the floor than in the air. So unless you're like Fat Joe licking your sneaker, you don't have very much to worry about in these settings, and that's just the first reference because again, they have some affirmative data, then they have more contradicting data. Let's take a look at reference five for example, and this was published in Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology. They made a special note that of 413 healthcare workers caring for the confirmed cases of COVID-19, 11 of them had unprotected exposure, yet none of them contracted the infection. That's interesting, isn't it? They collected air samples from a COVID patient with a significant viral load, and you would expect to find the virus in the air. However, they noted that after repeated tests, the virus was not detected in eight air samples collected at a distance of 10 centimeters from the patient's face with or without wearing a surgical mask.

Can you imagine somebody's having a apparatus like just right up by your face 10 centimeters away? First of all, it's annoying, but then you've got COVID, they're not picking any of it up, whether you have a mask on or not. This data exists. And they put it right in their own WHO-funded study. Shouldn't we know this? Why aren't they finding it in the air? You got COVID. Reference number six. This was published in the Journal of Hospital infection, stated that, "Our findings suggest that SARS CoV 2 is not spread by the airborne route." Even though they concluded that it's not spread by the airborne route, they go on to recommend the status quo, again, including the wearing of surgical masks because that's just standard practice. But if it's not spread through the airborne route, why wear a mask when they've been shown not to work in multiple clinical trials? It moves away from being science to being superstition, and that superstition is just continuing to be upheld right now more than ever. Okay.

Again, I want there to be some efficacy here, I want it to be true, at least a little bit to make some sense of what we're seeing out here, what we're being forced to do, or to pay fines, or to be assaulted by other people. We're fighting for something we don't even understand because we've given the illusion that this is helping people, that this is protective, that this is saving lives, but the real data continues to show that what we've been told is actually not the case. Let's look at one more, reference seven. This was published in Science of the Total Environment. It states that "We invested the air of patient rooms with confirmed COVID-19. All air samples which were taken from two to five meters from the patient's bed were negative. Our results concur with recent data published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, which indicated SARS CoV 2 could not be transmitted by airborne route, suggesting that airborne transmission is not driving the pandemic." This exists. Why are we ignoring that this exists? Not to say that it's not transmitted that way, but there's evidence that refutes that. Come on.

They go on to note that other reports may have seen that the virus can be spread through the airborne route, but that's not what they found in their own study. Alright? So again, there can be... Somebody can see this and they're like, "Well, they said that it's spread in the airborne route from other studies. They said it themselves." But that's not what they found in their study, and we just need to be able to take all this information in and have a logical, reasonable cost-benefit analysis, weigh the data and find out where we're accurate instead of becoming religious about these beliefs and these things and ignoring the fact that there's other data that exists that refutes what we have been told and the kind of conventional idea about all of this stuff.

Now, if you move down to the data analysis section here in their own WHO-funded study that all of these entities are using to affirm their effectiveness and censoring other data because they have this which is published in the Lancet again. Move down to the data analysis section. There's several references to how they compiled and analyzed the data, alright, but yet again, when you get to the actual reference point, specifically demonstrating the effectiveness of masks, like let's use reference 31, for example, here's what the results said: "We included 15 randomized trials investigating the effectiveness of masks in healthcare workers and the general population and of quarantine. Compared to not wearing masks, there was no reduction of influenza-like illness or influenza by wearing masks in the general population nor in healthcare workers. There was also no difference between surgical mask and N95 respirators for influenza-like illness or influenza."

These were the results from the studies. But again, because of the political climate, the authors write in a sentence in the conclusion: "Based on observational evidence from a previous report, we recommend the use of mask combined with other measures." Now, they said that they found, let me say this again, "Compared to not wearing mask, there was no reduction of influenza-like illness or influenza virus by wearing masks in the general population nor in healthcare workers." That's what they found. That was the results of the study, but yet they have that little sidebar, they have that little disclaimer to say, "Hey, we know we found that it doesn't work, but go ahead and still wear a mask anyway." Now, if you go through this hodge... There's a hodgepodge... I've never said hodgepodge before, but that's what it is... A hodgepodge of these observational studies.

They're so many, so I was just like, okay, Kobe's number, shout to Kobe: 24. So... But they didn't have 24 as an option for reference, so I was like double it: 48. So I clicked on 48, so this is reference 48 in this hodgepodge of observational studies. And this one was more like a math word problem, than an actual randomized controlled trial. Here's what it stated: "A severely ill MERS patient walks into a hospital, eight healthcare workers come in contact with him wearing a variety of things from N95 mask to a surgical mask to no mask at all. None of them get sick. But a security guard does. How effective are masks at preventing illness?" Well, the study clearly shows that the answer is FHB, which stands for Flaming Hot Bullshit because it provides no data at all. Why is this here? And then I was like, okay, we've got Kobe, who's another MVP? Steph Curry, they didn't have reference 30 here in the hodgepodge, so I doubled it, 60, clicked on 60. Here's what they found, it says, quote, "This investigation documents that under certain circumstances, SARS-CoV-2 is not readily transmitted to close contacts despite ample unprotected exposures." Even being unprotected. Why did they put this here? It exists. Reference 41. And this is important, this one actually found some evidence to support the effectiveness of N95 masks, but the study also noted that the N95 mask group was also mandated to strict handwashing versus the group not instructed to wear a mask.

And for some reason, they noted in this study, "Interestingly departments with a high proportion of male doctors seem to have a higher risk of infection." Huh. That's interesting. So was it the mask or was it the fact that men are notorious for not washing their hands as often? Am I just saying that? The guys out there know that it's true. But you got to look at the data. A study published in the Journal of Environmental Health had inconspicuous bathroom monitors track the handwashing frequency of thousands of people in public restrooms. The study found that approximately 15% of men didn't wash their hands at all. Ugh, they poopy or pee and didn't wash. 15%, as compared to 7% of women who didn't wash their hands at all. Nasty. Now, when they did wash their hands, only 50% of men used soap, compared to 78% of women. Overall, only 5% of the people who use the bathroom wash their hands long enough to kill the germs that can cause infections. Boom. Now, is this just an anomaly? And who are these inconspicuous bathroom monitors, by the way? You have to read the study. So I looked at another one. This was published in the American Journal of Public Health, and it set up tracking devices at a busy highway rest stop that monitored how many people entered the bathrooms, and how often soap dispensers were used.

The study found that only 31% of men and 65% of women washed their hands with soap. What? This is basic stuff. So again, 31% of men versus 65% of women. Was that study that specifically acknowledged that in areas where men... There's more male doctors have higher rates of infections, what could it be? What could it be? But I still want to acknowledge that the N95 mask was found, some kind of way in a hodgepodge mess, to be effective. So let's take that into consideration and make sure that we are using N95 masks, if they're effective, in the right circumstances. Now, in the Mask Facts documentary, I went on to go into some of the other studies that have been propped up as true reference points to how effective masks are, and break them down again and again, including studies that look at disease trends and the function of aerosols and droplets and not even, again, real-world, boots on the ground data. How effective is this really? So we go through all of that. So I'm not going to spend much more time here, but make sure if you haven't done so already, watch the Mask Facts documentary. It's at themodelhealthshow.com/maskfacts. That's where you can get access. Because when we published the Mask Facts video, I had no idea that it would even be controversial because we're just using the clinical evidence and helping folks to get educated to make a more informed decision.

I had no idea that it would even be controversial, and within 30 minutes, that video was taken down on YouTube. Within 30 minutes, it was censored on Instagram, censored on Facebook. Even still, we had about a million people watched it within the first two weeks. Even still, even with the censorship. Just imagine what it would have done if it had the capability to be shared and to be seen like all of the other misinformation that's out there. And it's so unfortunate that we live in a climate where if you don't fit into the popular narrative of what you're saying, your information could be hidden. Even if you go to Google and try to look for the Mask Facts documentary, you won't even find it. Google's not even showing it in their search results. For my own stuff, I... It's absolutely crazy that something like this is taking place, but it's up to us, it's up to us to get this information into our hands. To come into this with a willingness to learn and to really get educated and to share with each other, and stop all of the infighting over nonsense. We need to look at the big picture. And one of the other things that we covered in the documentary because with N95 masks having some effectiveness, there were studies that showed that it's not quite what it adds up to be if you're looking at the clinical evidence.

Including a 2017 study conducted by Chinese researchers that found that targeted intermittent use of the N95 respirators while doing high-risk procedures or caring for patients with known respiratory illnesses, wearing the N95 masks actually caused higher rates of viral infections in healthcare workers than those healthcare workers who were wearing surgical masks. This exists...

We can't ignore that this exists and even more surprising is that the participants wearing the N95 mask had higher rates of infection than in the control group who weren't required to wear either type of mask at all. There was no mandate. There was no accountability. They just got to do standard practice, whatever that meant for them. It's not showing up too good for the highly acclaimed N95 mask, but there's another part of the study and this is what's important. When the healthcare workers wore the N95 mask for their entire shift, there was a dramatic reduction in the rate of viral spread. So, it was found you just can't take it off and it has some effectiveness. Now, reasonably in this study, we can take the data into consideration, but in truth, this particular study has mixed results so I dug around for more. And there was a meta-analysis published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal that included six clinical studies including randomized controlled trials. In 23 surrogate exposure studies, and the scientists found no significant difference between N95 respirators and surgical masks and associated risk of laboratory-confirmed respiratory infection or influenza-like illness. This exists. Even the most prestigious mask doesn't seem to have any kind of domineering benefit over the least effective mask.

We need to know this, but there are contexts where the N95 appears to be more effective. But even in that context of like, "Okay, let's have people wear them all day," then we have to get into a simple logical cost-benefit analysis of, "Does wearing the mask that long have any detrimental effects?" Let's just take it into consideration. And so we went and looked into that as well. Now, this was a study that was published in the journal of Antimicrobial Resistance and Infection Control and it recruited pregnant healthcare workers to wear the N95 mask while doing just low-intensity activity. Somebody saw pregnant mothers, pregnant expecting mothers and they thought, "Hmm... I wonder if wearing this fitted N95 mask has any impact on the oxygen that's getting to their baby." Somebody just had to ask the question. And here's what the results found in the study. Wearing the N95 mask reduced their normal volume of air displays between inhalation and exhalation by 23%. The volume of gas inhaled or exhaled specifically from their lungs, each minute was reduced by 25.8%. Their volume of overall oxygen consumption was reduced by 13.8% and the ability to expire carbon dioxide was reduced by 17.7%. Now, you might think that this was because, well, they were wearing them for their whole shift.

No, this happened within 15 minutes of doing just low-intensity activity. This exists. We can't ignore that this is happening. It's not just happening to pregnant healthcare... This happens to all of us. What are the ramifications of doing this indefinitely because we're not actually using logic? Now, I can understand because a lot of us are experiencing a lot of fear and uncertainty right now and that causes us to have less activity in the more evolved prefrontal cortex that's responsible for logic and executive functions like distinguishing between right and wrong and social control and more of our brain activity is being moved to the more primitive parts of our brain, the more emotional parts of our brain like we're getting an amygdala hijack that causes us to make illogical assessments about things and also, to be very combative with other people who don't fit into what you believe to be the truth. We have to take back control of our minds right now more than ever, just bring patience, compassion, rationality, and logic to the table so we can figure this thing out because I would imagine that right now, after going through the data that we already have, we should be asking ourselves, "Why is the information being suppressed that refutes the popular narrative that masks are so effective and if we just wear a mask, we can stop the spread?" And people in other countries are wondering like, "Why don't Americans just put a mask on?" And everything will be okay.

When in truth, if you ask most people, when you go out anywhere here in this country, almost all of the people that you see are wearing masks. They've been doing it for months, but it hasn't been the solution for some reason. And every... Because you see the media, you see the people on the news, there's people out here, they're anti-maskers. They're parading around. We can't go anywhere. I live in the place where we've got the highest rate of infections, in California. You can't get in anywhere without a mask, just walking around neighborhoods, going to national parks. People are masked up. Why isn't it working? Because it's bullshit, very simple. What's the real message? I started with this. The number one risk factor is having a pre-existing chronic disease, obesity, diabetes type 2, and hypertension, three leading causes of having severe symptoms to SARS-CoV-2. What have we done in the last six months to help to eliminate or reduce people's risk factor for that? Never heard a damn thing about that, but you keep hearing commercials about wearing a fucking mask.

They never wanted to reduce the risk factor. That's not what they do. This system is not built that way. They're giving us the illusion that we're doing something to protect ourselves and the people we care about, that's why they're going so hard with the mask, to give us the illusion that we have some kind of control that we could do something, but what we can actually do is to get ourselves healthy, our families healthy and our communities healthy, starting now, that's the real solution because the system is sick, it's constructed systemically to keep you sick. Johns Hopkins University, you can go and look the study up for yourself, the third leading cause of death in the United States, number one, is heart disease, number two, cancer number three, medical intervention, dying from seeking help from our conventional medical system is the third leading cause of death in the United States. The system is not built to help you, our emergency medical care is amazing, amazing.

But they are absolutely horrendous when it comes to chronic diseases, I don't have to just make this up, everything every year keeps going up higher and higher and higher, trillions of dollars spent, they haven't solved shit. Heart disease keeps going up. Obesity keeps going... We've got almost 200 million people in the United States that are overweight or obese. We can't even fathom that number... We are the sickest nation in the world, and other countries are looking at us as like, "Why don't they just wear a mask," we are the sickest nation in the world, that's why we were so susceptible not to just SARS-CoV-2 but to everything. Everything. And right now, at this time in human history, we're being led to believe more than ever that we as a human being are inherently flawed, all we need is their drug, and then we can be able to exist in the world again, we're just missing their drug.

Then we can survive out there. All we need to do is to put a piece of cloth over our face then we can go out there and be safe again, we're lacking something, we don't have a built-in mask, we need to make a mask, then we can survive, then we can adapt. That's what we're being led to believe in a sick system, it never had the intention of fixing the underlying problem, it's been six months... I was talking about this early on, months ago, and then even healthcare professionals would tell me, it's a shame you're right, but we can't get people healthier overnight, and then I shared study after study after study showing how quickly you can improve someone's immune system within 24 hours. And that's in the Mask Facts documentary as well, because we got to the solution, I talked about how quickly you can suppress somebody's immune system, "Overnight," but it's not even overnight anymore, it's six months now.

And the conversation still hasn't shifted. It's up to us. I just want to thank you so much for spending your time with me, and I want to implore you to share this with the people that you care about. We have to override the censorship that's happening right now, giving people direct links to things, and of course, we're going to make this video accessible at the modelhealthshow.com/maskfacts as a complementary video to go along with the documentary. We can fix this, we can shift this conversation, but we have to have a shift in our thinking, we have to stand up for each other, we have to stand up for logic and reason, compassion and not allow this to become a politicized ideal, because we think that certain political parties are the one who are the "anti-maskers." I'm not anti-anything, I'm pro-science, I'm pro-human. And I know that the real issue is not being addressed, so whether or not... How much you agree or disagree? The fact remains that we need to fix the underlying root cause of our susceptibility to sickness, and this is the time to do it, 2020 is offering this opportunity. But it's up to us. The power is in our hands.

Thank you so much for hanging out with me. I hope that you enjoyed this and got a lot of insights and value from this, again, this was a video exclusive version, and I want to make sure that you check out the video so you can see it with your own eyes and go through the studies with me. It's at the modelhealthshow.com/maskfacts. That's where you could check it out, and I really want to make sure that we are answering a lot of questions so that we are armed with intelligence and insights when we continue to be faced with so many... Please understand, there is a lot more to come. And understanding the efficacy of the different studies where they're coming from, who's funding them, and ultimately... What are they saying, what are they telling us? There's another study, it just recently came out that is in a very prestigious peer-reviewed journal that is as of late publishing data that seems to be politicized and it's very strange. But this particular study by well-meaning scientists is asserting and they say the word clearly, theoretically, wearing a mask improves your immune system.

They said theoretically, yet people latch right on to it and they're like, "Listen, this study has found that masks actually improved your immune system," and their premise is that it inoculates you, they kind of give a comparison to a mask being like a vaccine without a vaccine, because you get just enough of the virus by wearing a mask. It reduces the amount of virus that you get, so it's kind of inoculating you. And it's a wildly theoretical assumption, but we latch on to it and we miss the point. The underlying premise of the data, so I want us to be able to... When the new stuff is coming, where is it coming from? What's the premise? Because we've got plenty of data that was done prior to everything being so politicized that show conclusively that masks are ineffective at preventing the spread of infectious diseases. Now, not to say that there isn't levels to that, and levels of intelligence and appropriate uses of masks, I think there are, but I want to make sure that we can make an intelligent, well-rounded decision so that we're not hurting ourselves...

More so than we're helping ourselves and that should be obvious, but when we're in this kind of politicized climate, we just go so hard to one theory. We go so hard to one train of belief that we can ignore the reality of all the other data that exists. And I want us to be better than that. Let's be better than that so we can have a comprehensive, compelling understanding. Because when you hear about these projective models like the one that was published by researchers at Texas A&M declaring that face masks prevented more than 66,000 infections in New York City in less than a month, and this particular study is in the Mask Facts documentary, which if you haven't seen that, where you at? Where... The Elon Musk, jumped in the spaceship, took a trip? If you're here on planet Earth, you need to watch the Mask Facts documentary, but this one was in there. And again, you can see the visual along with this and it's just like jaw-dropping when you can, from a logical-centered perspective, look at it. It should be like, "What is wrong with us? Why are we thinking something... This is something that it's not?" And so these researchers and the lead researcher in the study stated that "By analyzing the pandemic trends without face-covering using the statistical method and by projecting the trend, we calculated that over 66,000 infections were prevented by using a face mask in little over a month in New York City." Man, just a month, 66,000 prevented? 

But listen, statistical method, projecting the trend, these are theoretical models. And if the underlying premise of the projective model, of the theoretical model, is flawed and the underlying premise here is that masks are effective yet almost every single randomized controlled trial in the real world with real people have found them to be ineffective. This entire projective model is null and void so be able to keep your eyes out for these projective studies that are based on theory when we have some real factual data from real people. And one of the most interesting things about studies like this is that it's not just the fact of, okay, we got studies saying that they're ineffective, but when you have these projections, you're basing them on hasty assumptions of universal mask quality, mask fit, duration of time-worn, assumptions that the wearers aren't touching their face, that their aerosols and droplets haven't sprayed all over their bodies and their face and their hair and there's clouds of droplets above them, below them, off the sides of their mask. It eliminates all of those things. It's not taking that into consideration because that's what's happening in the real world all the time.

And if we put our logic pants on, that's new, you can use that, put on your logic pants, you'll absolutely know that this is inappropriate, the data, for that to be the thing propped up and jumped to the head of the line with our beliefs about these things, is inappropriate. I just wanted to point these things out again to keep your eye out because more is coming. It's a political football now. They're going to keep on pushing a narrative that's just not true. However, I am open. I am open to real-world, randomized trials, real examples of these things being effective, but I want to keep my eye on the reality that we've got data before all of this took place, before everything was so hot to trot that points to other than. And then we can take all of that into consideration. Now, even within that study, in the Mask Facts documentary, when they said that this happened within little over a month, 66,000 infections were prevented, if you look at the graph in their own study, the infection rate had tanked. It had already dropped its biggest drop at the end of the stay-at-home phase and then the masks were introduced, the mandated masks were introduced, yet they gave all the credit to the face mask and not the other interventions, social distancing, stay at home because the only true way of preventing a communicable disease that other people have and you don't is to stay away, is to stay away.

Not to negate that, but how do we operate in the world with a little bit more intelligence and understanding that the laws of how viruses work and what we believe is very different. These are two different things, two very different things. And this leans back to one more point that I want to share with you guys, which I just want to make sure that you're armed with this because it comes up so often, acknowledging that the randomized trial that we started this episode with or the video content that we put here on this episode, the gold standard of clinical evidence, again, this was published in the BMJ, the British Medical Journal, it was looking at the efficacy of mask to prevent viral infections in hospital healthcare workers in 15 different hospitals. In 14 of the hospitals, the data was all accepted because it was done well and they put them into three different groups. You know the results. It was found that cloth masks specifically led to 13 times more infections for the healthcare workers who were wearing the cloth mask. We should sound an alarm about it. What is the number one type of mask people are wearing? Cloth masks. Why? Because health officials and so-called experts were telling people, "Anything works. Anything goes. Put a diaper on your face. Put a lily pad. Put some sequence. It doesn't matter. Anything helps. Put a fruit roll up on your face. It doesn't matter. Anything helps. Stop the spread."

But again, we have data here that the researchers concluded this, listen. They concluded that "moisture retention and pore filtration may increase the risk of infection with cloth masks and cloth masks should not be recommended." That's a very specific language. Cloth masks should not be recommended. They found in this study the cloth mask had penetration by virus particles of almost 97% penetration. And medical masks were 44% penetration. I said it, that's a lot of penetration still. And this is why both types of masks were found to be ineffective. Yet one of the deflection points that's pretty common, again, I want to make sure that you're armed against this, is somebody might acknowledge the fact that this randomized controlled trial found a 97% penetration of cloth mask by a virus and 44% penetration of surgical mask by virus particles.

But someone makes the statement, "Okay, I know the data shows that my mask is ineffective at protecting me, but my mask will be effective at protecting others. I know it's not protecting me, but it will protect others." That's like saying to someone, "Hey, when I use this perforated holey condom that has 97% penetration of viruses through it, it isn't going to protect me, but it's definitely going to protect you." That's the same level of thinking. It doesn't work that way. It's illogical and it's a deflection point. That's marketing terminology. I'm doing this for you. Do it for others. Don't be selfish. If it doesn't work, and somebody even acknowledges, "Okay... " And I've seen this many times. People are like, "Okay, okay. So it's not effective, okay. But this is not about protecting me, it's about protecting others." They're just going back, it's kind of like default mode that they're jumping to. It's like their default programming.

But we have to understand that this is a result of right now. We've got billions of people on the planet. We've got hundreds of millions of people here in this country, in the United States, who are operating, who are being inundated with fear every single day. Our lives have been turned upside down. There's a tremendous amount of uncertainty. And then we have also many well-meaning people who've been indoctrinated with the status quo, the idea of the status quo. This is what we've always done. Of course, a mask works, doctors wear them. But I went through and I actually, in the Mask Facts documentary, shared all the data on whether or not masks actually work for the intention they were created for, which is to help to reduce infection of the patients in surgery. And all of the data concluded from some of the most prestigious journals that it's not even effective at doing that. The data exists, but we're still, we don't need to be wasting time battling with each other right now. We need to take all this data in and have a real healthy logical conversation on how do we operate and do this in the best fashion.

Again, this isn't about being anti-anything. It's about being pro-health, pro-human. What are the side effects of this behavior? What is this doing to our children? What is this doing to children who have critical, critical needs for social and emotional development? Their brains are craving to be able to get facial recognition and feedback from their peers. To be able to look into somebody's eyes to see what happens when I do this thing, what is the response that I'm getting back? Because it is literally helping to develop the human brain. What happens to our society? What happens to our children? We're doing this to an entire generation of children who are not able to get this very important social development done right now. Is it justified? Because what happens when somebody doesn't have that proper social developing taking place? When, again, we're talking about millions upon millions of years of evolution, and suddenly we stop being able to see each other's face and to be able to read that data. Is it worth it? If it is something that it truly is effective, I'm for it. But if it's not effective, and we're sacrificing the development of our children for no good science-based sound reason that doesn't have massive contradicting pieces to it, I think we need to assess it and take it in and protect our babies. And to truly get our citizens healthier.

The marketing right now is to put a mask on for somebody else. What I'm asking you to do is to reach out to the people that you care about, and make sure that they are okay. Make sure that their mental health is okay. Ask them questions, talk to them, reach out, connect. If you've got neighbors, the greatest of gift that you can do for them is make sure that they're getting out and going for a walk. Check-in and do that. Don't just put a mask on and think you're doing something for them. Call them. Knock on their door if you can socially distant depending on with the situation. Walk six feet distance, I don't care. That's so much more valuable and real and proven by science.

It's not even something that you can argue about that can improve their immune system function and dramatically reduce the risk of infection in the real world. That's the greatest thing that we can do. Reach out, encourage the people that we love and care about to make sure they're doing the things to take care of themselves. And for ourselves as well. Making sure that they're, "Are you sleeping okay? How's your sleep? You're not trying to complete Netflix, are you?" That's a goal for some people, they're trying to finish Netflix. Are you getting to bed and making sure you get plenty of rest? That's the most important thing to protect your immune system. Keep your immune system healthy, protect you from infection. And you make sure you're getting plenty of sleep. Do those things. Those are true act of love. True act of courage.

Not this, stand on the sideline and doing this impotent version of caring for others. That's not what it is. Alright, now, of course, as we move forward, we want to be open to change, open to new data, but we need to see things through clear vision. Seeing is believing, but feeling is the truth. And I hope that you're able to see some things clearly, that you're able to develop some new feelings of confidence and certainty and being able to manage these situations and conversations with the people that you care about and also with yourself, to just keep an open mind, at least, at least right now. And questioning things. Remain curious. Alright, remain curious, it's one of the most powerful characteristics that we can have right now. I truly believe that it's a superpower, not to take things at face value right now, make sure we got study after study, evidence after evidence after evidence before we make a decision. That's when I decided to do the documentary.

When I saw so much evidence from the real world randomized controlled trials that was saying something other than the popular narrative, I was like, "Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. We got to look at this. We got to talk about this." So I started talking about it. And it doesn't go with the popular narrative, but I want to make sure that people at least acknowledge that the data exists and take it into account. And right now, we need to continue to take each other into account, do things to provide for our families, a lot of us are working to reduce our expenses, and I absolutely love this because this is a way to pay it forward as well. And our shifting behavior in the way that we buy things or the way we buy food obviously is jumped online tremendously. But the great news is that we can get the very best high-quality foods and save money that we would be spending at these kinds of local health food stores, chain stores, Whole Foods, all that kind of stuff.

We can save 25-50% off, all of the retail prices that we see for our favorite products by shopping at Thrive Market, and they have the COVID-19 Relief Fund as well. I was able to, to donate a portion of my savings, our last order, we saved almost a $100 buying stuff that we already would be buying anyway, why not save that money? And I was able to donate a portion of the savings to the COVID-19 Relief Fund to help families that are in need. Whether they've been affected by the economic side, or the health side of this thing that's just turned our entire worlds upside down. We can do things that have multiple benefits like this. And, I got non-GMO, organic, clean beauty, safe supplements, nontoxic, home products, ethical, sustainable seafood, clean wines, the list goes on and on. Whatever you're looking for, they've got it. Paleo, gluten-free, vegan, vegetarian, whatever you're subscribed to, you're going to have the best companies curated through Thrive Market. And again, this is a way to pay it forward as well. Get membership. It is incredibly valuable. It's going to save you a ton of money and be able to help others.

Go to thrivemarket.com/modelhealth, together as one word, that's thrivemarket.com/modelhealth. And not only are you going to save 25-50% off, all of the purchases that you're getting there right off the bat, but right now they're also giving you a free gift up to like a $22 value, and you get to pick... They have different gifts up at different weeks, different months, so you'd be able to pick a free gift valued at up to $22, right now when you get your new membership to Thrive Market. Alright, so pop over there, check 'em out, thrivemarket.com/modelhealth. And again, right now, remember that statement that we started with. Seeing is believing, but feeling is the truth. And these two things go hand-in-hand.

I love the statement from Michael Beckwith that says, "You don't describe what you see, you see what you describe." And the world is really painted from the inside out. There's a lot of things going on in the world, but there's also a lot of good. There's also a lot of beauty, there's also a lot of opportunity, we've got some big changes to make, but we need to do this from a place of a new vision. What can all of this lead to, in a new world that really works for all of us, what does that vision look like? We have to see it so that we can work our way to it. It can look really bad when there's so much chaos going on and we're trying to fight the power or trying to fight the system. But we have to hold a space and hold a vision for something better. Because I truly believe this is brought to us right here in 2020, as an opportunity to change systems, and they're not broken, they were never meant to work in the first place. And so now that they're all in flux, we can get rid of them and build something better.

I appreciate you so much for tuning in. If you got a lot of value out of this, please share this out with the people that you care about on social media, you can tag me, I'm @shawnmodel on Instagram and Twitter, @TheModelHealthShow on Facebook, and of course, you could share this directly from the podcast app that you're listening on, right to friends and family, helping to get educated. I appreciate you so much for tuning in, take care, have an amazing day, and I'll talk with you soon. 

And for more after the show, make sure to head over to themodelhealthshow.com. That's where you can find all of the show notes, you can find transcriptions, videos for each episode, and if you've got a comment, you can leave me a comment there as well. And please make sure to head over to iTunes and leave us a rating to let everybody know that this show is awesome, and I appreciate that so much. And take care, I promise to keep giving you more powerful, empowering, great content to help you transform your life. Thanks for tuning in.

Maximize Your Energy

Get the Free Checklist: “5 Keys That Could Radically Improve Your Energy Levels and Quality of Life”

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

0 comments. Be the first to leave a comment.

WANT TO MAKE A BIGGER IMPACT ON THE WORLD?

Take Your Passion For Health And Wellness And Turn It Into A Lucrative Career.

Helping others to transform their health is one of the most rewarding things you can do. No matter what level you're at, or where you are on your own health journey, there are countless people who can benefit from your support! Here you'll learn from the very best instructors in the world in health AND in business to create a fun, thriving career and live life on your terms.