and welcome to tucker carlson. tonight, for thousands of yearsi ,clinicanel trials have beene be the center of medicine. and the idea is very simple. you before you operate on someow or inject people with some trias first. to make certain that w new drug, you run trials first to make certain that what you re doing will helpis is no the patient more than it hurts the patient. this is not a new idea. james lynn did it back inh the 18th century with his famous scurvy trials . in fact, medical testing hast bc been going on since at least biblical times. is why wouldbecause why wouldn , daniel, if judah compared toal l vegetarian diet with the diet td of the royal babylonians over a ten day period, we had a control group, independent observers, the whole thing. it s not complicated, but it is essential through history.oni very few have questioned this practice because it makes obviouit m sense, s sense. but now they are moderndern m medicine seemsed to be abandonig the clinica
couple financial and fun. and i m going to go twenty four hundred, twenty six days, h one years ago. but now the cost of how much money each patient would bring in, and this is only including top surgery, includingies. antibiotics, surgery.lot and it s a lotof of money, every surgery and a lot of money. so female to male chest reconstruction could bring in forty thousand patients justjus on routine hormone treatment. i m only a few times a year and bring in several thousand td dollars x he makes dollars, are motivated in the lab and actually make money for the hospital. oh, it makes money.money so this huge trend appears again, driven not by medical research, but by social media c convincing children they can cag change their . and vanderbilt, rather than pausing and asking once agai n, how do we help these children? what is this decides?th oh, there s money there. we re all in now. it s hard to believe thatat evey oneveryone at vanderbilt hospitl
we have 15 people in the country who are making major decisions for all of us with hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars.x j1x the koch brothers for example, already agreed to spend $1 billion in this election cycle. is that america? i don t think so. so if i can wave a magic wand, i will say i want the supreme court to reverse that decision so there is control on how much x money can be spend on the campaign. campaigns. is without the magic wand available for you, what can be done? i mean, i was surprised to see senator clinton puts that issue that you just described right at the forefront of what she says she wants to do with her candidacy. if that is what she runs on, that right at center of american politics. and the point of focus for a national debate. what can be done? does it have to be a constitutional amendment?