For most of our lives, we’ve been taught that viruses make us sick. But there is important evidence that has been overlooked by both virologists and the public. Today, Alec Zeck, the Executive Director and Founder of the Way Forward, breaks down viruses. He reviews the history of virology, the assumptions behind the science, and explains where we’ve gone wrong in our understanding of what causes ill health. His conclusions, based on his extensive research, paint a very different picture of the “pandemic” of recent years and offer insights for the days ahead. This is an episode that may challenge what many of us thought we knew about viruses.
Visit Alec’s website: The Way Forward
Become a member of the Weston A. Price Foundation
For more resources on viruses:
Study on Amphotericin B: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3194987/
Study on Gentamicin toxicity: https://sciendo.com/downloadpdf/journals/arls/1/1/article-p111.pdf
Study on COVID death risk factors: https://www.cdc.gov/pcd/issues/2021/pdf/21_0123.pdf?fbclid=IwAR2p5g4KXqdUY948K7YxZhc3X2A3PFA_j3tYqxhaYRVN2vZKQijGzpF_KBs
Alec’s presentation, Debunking the Nonsense: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nPSViaPCGrM&t=2776s
Amazing resource on all things virology: https://viroliegy.com/
Listen to the podcast here
Within the below transcript the bolded text is Hilda.
For most of our lives, we have believed in the infectious disease paradigm. We have been taught to believe that viruses make us sick. What if we have been misled? What if we have overlooked important evidence that points in another direction? If viruses don’t make us sick, what does? This is episode 412, and our guest is a former Army Captain and the Executive Director and Founder of The Way Forward, a grassroots movement focused on dissolving illusions and raising awareness on issues related to health and autonomy.
Our guest has done extensive research on viruses. He shares with us his conclusions that paint a different picture of the “pandemic” of recent years. Our guest is Alec Zeck. He breaks down our understanding of viruses and the science behind virology. He suggests that we all need to reexamine our assumptions about viruses and well-being. He begins by showing us the history of viruses. Alec also shares some intimate stories about his own health journey along the way.
Go to Serenity Farm Bread and use the code WiseTraditions10 for 10% off of your purchase.
Welcome to the show, Alec.
Thank you for having me. This is awesome. It is an honor.
We wanted to have you on because all of our lives, we have lived by this infectious disease paradigm. In other words, someone has a cold, and we are sure someone else in the family is going to get it. The next thing you know, the whole family has a cold. What makes you so sure that this isn’t what is happening when it comes to sickness?
As I have come to understand it, that is not the way the body works. Oddly enough, I’m going to be referencing a lot of things that Tom Cowan, who I know is on the board of Weston A. Price, said. Bear with me for those who have already read this. We have been conditioned to believe that this phenomenon of two or more people getting sick, there is definitive proof that it is caused by a submicroscopic pathogenic particle that is passed from person to person.
Ironically, because of that, we are overlooking not only all the things that are causing us to be sick but also all the things that produce wellness. When we have the foundation wrong, we are going to misattribute certain things to things that aren’t there. We are also going to create a framework for health that is established off of a flawed basis. That leads us to vaccination, masking, social distancing, and sanitizing everything.
We are overlooking not only all the things that are causing us to be sick but also all the things that produce wellness.
That is why this topic is important. To answer more specifically, in order to make an assertive claim about something, that claim requires proof. That is a common axiom of law. If you are making a positive claim, you are required to provide proof for that claim. The so-called proof for virology is non-existent. A lot of people will confuse this because if I were to tell you that SARS-CoV-2 has never been isolated or proven to exist, or if I were to insert any other virus in places SARS-CoV-2 until it hasn’t been isolated or proven to exist, you would likely go on Pub Med or Google Scholar or ask an expert friend of yours.
You would find hundreds of thousands of papers describing in detail, or what seems to be in detail, the isolation of SARS-CoV-2, the characterization of SARS-CoV-2, the pathogenicity, and all these different types of variants, which we can get into. The way that they go about proving the existence of SARS-CoV-2 is the following process. They take snot from a sick person they assume contains a virus or multiple virus particles. They add that snot to what is called a viral transport medium. Inside the viral transport medium, at the least contains gentamicin and amphotericin B, which we can get into. Those are cytotoxic antibiotics and antimycotics known to be toxic, specifically to kidney cells.
They take that mixture and sometimes filter it to filter out what they say are particles of known size because they will say that a virus is a certain size. They are basing that off of this experiment, which is ironic and circular reasoning. They will take that substance and add it to a foreign cell culture. Typically, a Vero E6 or a Vero CCL-81 which is coming from an adult green monkey.
They also add gentamicin and amphotericin B, trypsin, sometimes penicillin, streptomycin, fetal bovine serum, minimal essential medium Dulbecco’s Modified Eagle Medium. Any one or more of those substances are added alongside this unpurified snot that is assumed to have a virus particle. All of these confounding variables are mixed in. The cell experiences what is called a cytopathic effect, which means it is breaking down into a bunch of fragments. They take those fragments and prepare them for electron microscopy, which, in and of itself, is loaded with a bunch of assumptions.
What is required? Heating, staining, freezing, rehydrating, dehydrating, and bombarding it with electron beams. If I were to take you in your natural state and do that to you, I would imagine you probably wouldn’t look like you did in your natural state. They take these electron micrograph images that are produced, point to the particles, and assertively claim that those are proof of SARS-CoV-2 or insert any other virus. Those result in particles is virus particles. We can get into the fallacies of electron microscopy itself.
What is crossing my mind is simply this. If they put all those things into a Petri dish to try to identify a virus, it is this huge chemical concoction that is going to have all particles in it. It boggles the mind to think they can throw all those things in, expect they can point to one thing, and say, “This is the cause of the problems a person had. That is what you are trying to get across.
They assume that these other substances are added. As an example, amphotericin B is an antimycotic. They say, “It is added to the culture to keep it sterile and free from any fungi.” Gentamicin and penicillin-streptomycin are antibiotics that keep the culture free of bacteria. There is a study that a friend of mine sent me. This one is specifically regarding amphotericin B and in the abstract of the study, and I would like people to read more than the abstract. I can send this so you can put it in the show notes. They described that amphotericin B enhancing effects seem to be solely due to the viral function. Our results indicate that the use of amphotericin B may facilitate influenza virus isolation production of viral cells.
Amphotericin B is toxic and increases cellular breakdown. What I have come to understand viruses to be, if anything, if we are basing what happens in a cell culture, which is an assumption in and of itself because that is taking tissue from a complex biological, physical, emotional, chemical, spiritual, and electric being. Assuming that mixing things in some isolated cells represent what is happening in that complex being is already a ridiculous assumption.
If we are assuming that, all we know viruses to be is the breakdown product of a decaying cell. That is what viruses are. You could throw exosomes, extracellular vesicles, or multivesicular bodies into that category. I urge anyone that is reading to do this themselves. Look up on Google or whatever you use for your search engine, amphotericin b toxic kidneys. Look at that up as keywords. You will find a number of articles describing how amphotericin B is known to be cytotoxic to kidneys and cause renal failure. That is one of the common side effects of amphotericin B.
The context here is they are putting amphotericin B on a monkey kidney cell, assuming that it has no effect on the cell and it is just there to keep the culture free of fungi. The same can be said for gentamicin. In this study, this is what it says, “Our data reveal that gentamicin has a significant cytotoxic and adverse effect on the cell liability.” In other words, what that is saying is gentamicin is toxic and increases cellular breakdown. It induces the cytopathic effect.
The point is, they are making all of these assumptions. They assume that the virus is inside the fluids. They never validate that there is a virus inside the fluids. They assume it is there. They assume that all these other substances that are added have no negative effect on the monkey kidney cell. They assume that the virus is the one that produced the effect. They assume there is no synergistic toxicity between any of these substances they are adding. They assume that the resultant particles are viruses.
In response to that, people will say, “We know that disease is passed via the fluids of a sick person.” That hasn’t been established either. You look back at the Rosenau experiments during the Spanish flu. That is one of many experiments that have been done where they tried to infect people with the fluids of a sick person via taking swabs of mucus and putting it in the back of their throat, taking infected blood from a sick person and injecting it into healthy patients, or having them interact in close quarters with sick people in the Spanish flu ward, in the case of the Rosenau experiments.
We have documented twelve-plus experiments. I got to give credit where credit is due. Mike Stone from ViroLIEgy and I did a presentation together that is somehow still available on YouTube and has 60,000 views. It hasn’t been removed. He documents countless examples of where they have attempted to prove that disease is passed via the fluids of a sick person, and they cannot do it.
There are a lot of studies claiming to have done it. In those studies, you will find that they will take a rat that was raised in an environment that a rat is not supposed to be raised in. It is in a perpetual state of fear. It is being fed a diet that a rat is not supposed to eat. It has already been subject to various other experiments in some cases.
They will take unpurified fluids from a sick person that they assume contains a virus. They will say that they verify that the virus is present via the sequencing process. They will pump its stomach full of fluids or jam it down its throat. The rat will develop symptoms, and they will say, “That is proof of pathogenicity.” That’s not proof of pathogenicity. It is ridiculous.
I have a hard time believing that virologists who have been committed to identifying viruses and preventing sickness all their lives have gotten it all wrong. They have been dedicating their lives. I’m trying to understand. You are not a virologist. How is it that you and others have been able to unlock this layer of assumptions that have gone south?
This is such a good question because this is what we are oftentimes met with, “You think all virologists are in on it.” Even people amongst the so-called health freedom or truth movement will say the same thing, like, “You mean to tell me that all virologists are wrong. They are all in on this grand scheme together to manipulate the world and into believing in these infectious particles?”
That is not at all what we are claiming. Virologists have been taught this method for “isolating viruses,” which came from John Franklin Enders in the 1950s. This has been ushered in with minor variations over time to be the accepted way to isolate viruses. Virologists are taught this, and they were like, “We already know this is how we isolate viruses. They are producing all these effects. Sometimes they are very consistent.”
The problem is they have never been taught to question their foundational premise. For those in the health freedom movement that says, “I cannot believe that all virologists are in on it.” You think that overwhelmingly doctors have gotten it wrong with regard to vaccination. Are you saying all doctors are in on it? No, we are not saying all doctors are in on it. They have been let misled. It is the same thing.
It is not that I think they are in on it. I think, “How could they have spent their whole life studying viruses and have misunderstood it if they are committed to the thing?” What you are saying is they are identifying particles or the fallout of all this ingredient crazy soup, and they are identifying an exosome as a virus when indeed, it is something else altogether.
We can point to several studies where the electron micrograph images are produced through the electron microscopy process. They have identified morphologically indistinguishable particles from SARS-CoV-2. They are finding particles that are not SARS-CoV-2 because they were in patients prior to the COVID-19 era, but they are identical to SARS-CoV-2, although not SARS-CoV-2.
We have identified a number of studies that are like this. There are electron micrograph images that are produced, and it is multivesicular bodies, exosomes, or extracellular vesicles. To the untrained eye, they will say in these papers, but to anyone, these particles look identical to SARS-CoV-2. They could be misappropriated or misattributed to be infectious particles when they are not.
That shows that there are multiple pieces here. The experiments claiming to have shown infection or the experiments where they have attempted to show contagion via the fluids have turned out to show the opposite of the isolation process itself and, more specifically, on the isolation process. We have come to understand that it is pseudoscientific by definition because the definition of pseudoscience is anything claiming to be scientific that does not adhere to the scientific method.
A scientific method is strict. The independent variable is your presumed cause. You have to have that to manipulate it to see if it produces the effect, which is the dependent variable. In virology, they don’t even get off the ground with a scientific method past the point of hypothesis because they have no independent variable. They are presumed to cause the virus particle in nature.
They have to take what they assume contains it, an assumption that you want to limit with a scientific method, and add it to a foreign cell culture alongside all of these other confounding variables I mentioned before. It breaks down into a bunch of fragments. They take the byproduct of that and then proceed with experimentation. It is all based on assumption, and it is fundamentally pseudoscientific.
More specifically, the germ theory isn’t even a proper theory because in order to be regarded as a scientific theory, that implies that you have adhered to the scientific method and had repeated experimentation. They have not adhered to the scientific method within virology. This could also be applied, from what I have explored, to bacteriology as well. This could be applied to that because they have not shown in isolated forms that these bacteria are pathogenic. The germ theory is not even a proper scientific theory. They are the germ hypothesis.
Virologists say that they simply cannot identify a virus without a live culture. What they are trying to do is have it live on something. You are saying that it is folklore. It has been brought into how they operate. They don’t even question the premise of the foundation of their field of work.
Not only does virology not adhere to this scientific method, but we can also bring in logic and reasoning to determine whether virology adheres to that in any capacity. Overwhelmingly, virology relies on several logical fallacies in order to maintain its stature amongst society. An example of that is when we approach virologists or molecular biologists and ask why a virus cannot be isolated according to the scientific method or it cannot be isolated, purified, or characterized in sequence directly from the fluids of a sick host. They will say that a virus is too weak to isolate or purify directly from the fluids of the sick host.
It is a little bit odd because they will say that a virus travels freely through the air, lands on a surface, survives on a surface for upwards of 2 to 3 days, makes it all the way to a body, makes it to a cell, breaks into the cell, hijacks the cell’s machinery and begins a replication process. It excreted out of that person, where it repeats the same process over again. It is too weak to isolate or purify directly from the fluids, but it does all those things.
They will also say, “There is not enough virus present in the fluids to isolate or purify it.” It is a little bit odd because they will also claim that there are upwards of 200 million virus particles in the fluids of a sick person. How is there not enough of this submicroscopic pathogenic disease-causing agent present to isolate a purify? They will say, “A virus needs a host in order to replicate. That is why we use the cell culture.”
We are talking about all the assumptions that are applied to this process, and they don’t conduct proper control experiments. They will refer back to what is called a mock-infected culture. If you read any of these virology papers or isolation papers, you will find that they don’t describe in detail what happens with the mock. They loosely allude to it or refer back to it or the mock-infected culture will contain different levels or types of antibiotics and antimycotics. They are not even conducting proper control experiments.
Even with that, if we are assuming that the virus particle is supposed to be the independent variable, you are supposed to treat the control the same, except that you don’t include the independent variable. That would mean you would want to include snot from a healthy person. That would be the more appropriate thing to do here. They don’t describe it in detail, but they will treat it with everything except for the fluids from a sick host, and say, “The mock didn’t experience a cytopathic effect, or maybe it experienced it a few days after.” That is not a true control experiment.
The most important point with all these things is the virus is too weak to isolate. There is not enough virus present to isolate. A virus needs a host in order to replicate. Those are reification fallacies, where you are assigning characteristics to something that is fundamentally abstract that has not proven to be a real thing. The last one we are always met with is, “You are not a virologist. You don’t get to determine what isolation is.” It doesn’t matter what my credentials are because the evidence is evidence. You either adhere to the scientific method or you don’t. You adhere to logic or you don’t. That is an appeal to authority, a logical fallacy in and of itself too.
Evidence is evidence. You either adhere to the scientific method or you don’t.
It must be difficult to have this different point of view. You studied in West Point, which is all about chains of command. Are you suggesting that we buck authority?
I am grateful for my time at West Point because, and I say this while ironically also saying, “Many of my classmates and other West Point graduates had the same training as me. We have tunnel vision and completely discounted what we were supposed to have learned.” We were taught to question authority at West Point. We are taught never to obey an unlawful and unethical order. We were always taught this phrase, “Trust but verify.” You are supposed to trust your subordinates and superiors, but you also verify to make sure that what they are doing is correct morally, ethically, logically, and scientifically for cases that the science applies. It does in this case.
I like to speak about this real quick. I am disappointed with the overwhelming majority of people in the Department of Defense, especially West Point graduates because I know we were taught these things. Speaking specifically to the unlawful and ethical piece, we are taught never to obey an unlawful or unethical order. What we saw over the last few years is, overwhelmingly, leaders amongst the Department of Defense in the US Army chose to not only obey unlawful unethical orders but enforce unlawful and unethical orders.
There are two US codes that back up, and they have overturned the mandates, but I have been screaming this from the rooftop since the beginning. Two US codes that back up a service member’s right to decline an emergency use product, which applies to not only the shots but also the masks and the PCR test. 21 US code 360bbb-3 applies to service members and civilians alike, saying that anything improved under emergency use cannot be mandated.
10 US code 1107a also applies specifically to service members and upholds their right to refuse emergency-use products. Despite that, I saw many people in the Department of Defense in the US military enforcing these orders. The other thing in the cadet prayer at West Point states specifically, “Always choose the harder right over the easier wrong.” What I saw is the exact opposite of that over the last several years.
Thank you for addressing that. It is important to trust but verify for all of us. I wanted to ask you since you mentioned all those codes with interesting numbers. It reminds me of the new variant that has been described by the CDC and other news agencies. What are they coming up with there, Alec? If there aren’t viruses, what are they pointing to say, “There is something new that is out and about, and it is going to get us all?”
In order to know how they are doing the process for variants, you have to know how they came up with the first genome of this virus. They extracted every fragment of RNA they could from an unpurified sample coming from a sick patient in Wuhan, which ended up being 56.5 million fragments of RNA. They uploaded it into two different computer programs, Megahit and Trinity, which are used for genomic sequencing in this process called alignment. They strand together fragments of RNA based on a template of other coronaviruses, and in this case, Bat-CV or something. There was this one other so-called coronavirus that they isolated.
Going back to the isolation process, that is how they isolated that one. They have it templated off of this one. They found it to be 89% similar. Before that, they generated 1 million possible genomes of a “new virus” using these fragments of RNA templated against a previous coronavirus. They arbitrarily voted on the longest one, which ended up being 30,000 base pairs. They said, “This one is 89% similar in terms of its genome to this previous coronavirus that we ‘isolated.’ This is the genome for this new virus, which we are going to call SARS-CoV-2.”
How they come up with a variance is they repeat that same process over again, extracting fragments of RNA, or they will test a sample of fluid with the RT-PCR process, which is used in the genomic sequencing process. They will send that sample off to get it sequenced. They will find it to be 98% to 99% similar to the original SARS-CoV-2 genome. Because they can’t get a 100% match, they will say, “This is a variant of SARS-CoV-2.” If there are specific traits or sequences that they deem to be more important, they will say, “This is an indication of a mutation. We are now going to announce that this is a variant of SARS-CoV-2.”
If they are starting from a false premise, as you suggested earlier, what difference does it make to the general population? How would this help us take more ownership of our health? How has it helped you?
A step above the understanding that there is no proof of these viruses is the understanding that symptoms of illness are not bad. There seems to be a split amongst the health freedom community between no virus and virus. I’m a proponent of the no virus position, but something we can all come to an agreement on, and we should come to an agreement on that could help those who cannot see regardless of perspective on virus versus no virus is the understanding that symptoms of illness are not bad. Symptoms are good. There is something to be celebrated. It is your body doing what it was designed to do to heal.
Our bodies are amazing creations. If we are experiencing symptoms, it’s the water inside of our bodies heating up to become less viscous to flush out, which is why we have diarrhea. We throw up, sweat, sneeze, and cough. Our body is heating up to flush those emotional or physical toxins out of us. If we can all unite on that front that symptoms of illness are not bad, it is our beliefs surrounding symptoms that make them bad.
Symptoms of illness are not bad. It is our beliefs surrounding symptoms that make them bad.
In July 2021, the CDC put out a study where they are setting out to determine the strongest risk factors for death associated with a COVID label, which means nothing because COVID implies being sick because of SARS-CoV-2. It has never been proven to exist. Nonetheless, the first strongest risk factor was obesity, which is not surprising. The second strongest risk factor was fear/anxiety-related disorders. That was the second strongest risk factor for death associated with COVID, according to the CDC in a study published in July of 2021.
I thought you were going to say diabetes or something else. That is a mental and emotional health situation.
You could consider a person who accepts the mainstream narrative to ask, “Why did they keep us in a perpetual state of fear and anxiety, given that their own study indicates this is a huge risk factor for death associated with COVID, the second strongest one?” Given that, it is our own mental constructs and condition beliefs surrounding symptoms of illness being bad and something to fear that is perpetuating, worsening them, and leading us to make decisions that are bad for our health. It is leading us to make decisions where they are able to manipulate and coerce us into these.
An important point to make here is they didn’t force us to do anything. We consented to it to varying degrees. If we had simply said, “No,” which didn’t require any violence, hostility, belligerence, petitioning the government, or anything like that for our families and us and our communities. For those of us who did not want to comply in any way with any of this nonsense, how we said, “I’m not doing that. I’m going to continue to live my life.” None of this would have happened. It is all because we chose to do it. There is so much talk about what they are doing to us. They are not doing anything. They are coercing and manipulating us, but we are the ones making the decisions.
Let’s back up for a minute, Alec. If all those people with comorbidities, obesity, fear, and anxiety weren’t dying from COVID or the virus, what were they dying from?
This is how we ended up connecting. You found my Reel that went viral where I talked about, “If not a virus, what is causing us to be sick?” For the sake of the effect of that Reel, I will go ahead and rattle off everything that I had rattled off on that Reel. If not a virus, what’s making us sick? I don’t know. Perpetual fear, poor nutrition, herbicides, pesticides, stress, overuse of pharmaceuticals, poor sleep, poor gut health, heavy metals, toxic skin products, EMF exposure, and dental procedures.
Also, toxic air fresheners, toxic cleaning products, lack of community, overuse of antibiotics, overconsumption of sugar, pasteurized inorganic dairy, fast food, processed foods, refined grains, lack of time in nature, lack of exercise, poor detox pathways, unhealed trauma, seed oils, toxic tap water, lack of minerals, soda, overconsumption of alcohol, smoking, poor oral hygiene, chemtrails shots, and many other things.
That is the problem. We are myopically focused on this unproven idea of these submicroscopic particles that are passed from person to person. All of our attention is on that. They were overlooking the many known things that make us sick and the other possible things we haven’t explored that could also be making us sick.
The skeptic or the person who has a different point of view, who thinks there still is a contagion, could still take ownership of their health and make some changes to improve their baseline. Regardless of what they think, they will be better off in the end.
I can point to CDC studies that indicate this exact same thing. Another study that is published by the CDC showed that 79% of hospitalizations with a COVID label were in people who were overweight or obese. According to the CDC running statistics on COVID, 95% of COVID-labeled deaths had an average of four comorbidities, most being lifestyle and nutrition-related, and contextualized with fear/anxiety being the strongest risk factor for death.
If you are treating your body as a temple, maintaining true mind, body, spirit, and wellness, staying out of perpetual fear, eating organic food, spending time in nature, spending time in community with people that you love, detoxifying yourself, moving your body, and spending time in the sun, you are not going to be sick. If you do get sick, it is not something to fear. It is your body doing what it was designed to do to detoxify to come back to a state of wellness. It is not a bad thing. It is that made-up story around symptoms being bad that we are clinging onto that is creating a situation in which it is about.
Getting sick is not something to fear. It is your body doing what it was designed to do to detoxify and come back to a state of wellness.
You are talking about ancient traditions that the Weston A Price Foundation embraces. We are all about the nutrient-dense foods, the sunshine, the community, and all the elements you were speaking about. Have you or anyone in your family, Alec, ever suffered from health concerns? If so, how did you gain this perspective and insight into healthy living?
What thrust me into this position that I’m in now is my wife was chronically ill under the care of conventional rheumatology with what we thought were two autoimmune conditions, rheumatoid arthritis, and lupus. She was chronically ill for upwards of several years under the care of multiple rheumatologists who told her she had always felt this way and was chronically ill. She has to be on multiple different types of immunosuppressive drugs.
Your ESR is the inflammation level in your blood. Prior to going on Plaquenil, which is hydroxychloroquine and is funny in itself, her ESR, the inflammation level in her blood, was off the charts. She was chronically inflamed. She went on hydroxychloroquine. It dropped a little bit, but that led to side effects, which led to her going on more pharmaceutical drugs. She was on this whole gambit of pharmaceutical products over the course of many years.
Over the course of several months in 2016, we simply adopted back then what was a Whole30 diet and tapered her off her medications. She practiced mindfulness, started meditating, and spending more time in nature. She starts working out more regularly, focusing on detoxifying, and feeling her emotions rather than suppressing them and stuffing them down.
In a matter of a few months, she was off all of her medications. She was like, “I feel better than I have ever felt before. Let’s get blood work to see if I have reversed this.” Her ESR was normal for the first time ever. The doctor was like, “The drug that I put you on seems to be working well for you.” She was like, “I’m not on any drugs at all. I’m doing way better.”
I hope he or she learned something at that moment.
There is another situation with my mom where she healed from a psychiatric issue she had struggled with. Thank goodness for Dr. Kelly Brogan because she is the one who pushed us to start doing this with our family. It was my mom first, and after we saw that with my mom, we decided to try the same thing with my wife.
Seeing my mom and my wife, who were chronically ill, one is almost dying. In the case of my mom, under the care of traditional psychiatry, rheumatology, and allopathic medicine, and see both of those people who are chronically ill completely heal after adopting a more natural approach to health, reconnecting with nature, and eating organic food. These are simple things. It sent me down a never-ending journey of questioning everything. I had been commissioned as an officer in the Army. That was a tough position to be in, but here I am.
Thank you for sharing those stories. I’m sure it was life-changing. Look at you now. You are in charge of The Way Forward and leading people down positive paths. What you shared is a great segue into the final question of the show. If the readers could do one thing to improve their health, Alec, one step in the right direction, what would you recommend they do?
Be authentically you. Stop allowing other people and circumstances to dictate who you are. Many people don’t even know who they authentically are because they don’t even realize how much their lives are being dictated by what other people think is best for them. That leads us down a path of not only physical ill health but mental ill health.
When we are not in alignment with who we are and our nature, we are destined for a life of disease. When we realign with who we truly are and our natural principles, that leads to a life of true health.
When we are not in alignment with who we are and nature, we are destined for a life of disease. When we realign with who we truly are and our natural principles, stop allowing other people to dictate who and what we are, stop caring what other people think, and be authentically us as long as we are coming from a position of love and compassion, that leads to a life of true health,
Those are powerful words to end on. Thank you so much, Alec. It has been a pleasure.
Thank you so much.
Our guest was Alec Zeck. Visit The Way Forward Membership to learn more. You can find me at Holistic Hilda. Now for a review from Apple Podcasts, Gimmeaniknamethatsnotaken, wrote this, “Where it’s at. We need ALL of this ALL the time. I can’t stop sharing.” Gimmeaniknamethatsnotaken, this is a lovely review. I love the all caps and the emoji.
You, too, may leave us a review on Apple Podcasts. Go to ratings and reviews. Give us as many stars as you like, and tell us why you love the show. It is not to make us feel good, although it does do that. It is to invite others to see the worth of the program and let them know it is worth taking a read. Thank you so much for reading. In the meantime, my friends, stay well and remember to keep your feet on the ground and your face to the sun.
About Alec Zeck
Alec Zeck received his B.S. in Systems Engineering from the United States Military Academy at West Point. He is a speaker, writer, podcaster, and former Army Captain. He is the former Executive Director and Founder of Health Freedom for Humanity and is the founder and director of The Way Forward.
- The Way Forward Membership
- The Way Forward
- Serenity Farm Bread
- Paleo Valley
- Optimal Carnivore
- Study on Amphotericin B
- Study on Gentamicin toxicity
- Study on COVID death risk factors
- Study on COVID hospitalizations
- COVID data on comorbidities
- Alec’s presentation, Debunking the Nonsense
- Holistic Hilda