Who is Cally Means? Exploring major arguments he makes on Tucker Carlson’s show

Cally Means, the founder of TruMed, recently shared compelling insights into the pharmaceutical industry during an appearance on Tucker Carlson’s show. Means, drawing from his extensive experience in the pharmaceutical sector, argued that TV pharmaceutical ads serve as a strategic tool to influence and manipulate the news media, rather than primarily aiming to sell drugs to consumers.

Who is Cally Means?

Also read | Tucker Carlson spotted in Russia to interview Vladimir Putin: Report

According to Means, pharmaceutical companies heavily invest in TV ad spending as a public relations and lobbying tactic, attempting to sway the news media and hinder critical investigations into their practices. The conversation expanded to the media’s role in suppressing inquiries into vaccine safety, with Means pointing out criminal penalties faced by major vaccine makers, suggesting an unsettling alignment between pharmaceutical companies and the media.

Focusing on Ozempic, a diabetes drug marketed for weight loss, Means outlined three key reasons he finds the drug problematic. He criticized the influence of food companies on nutritional guidelines and government subsidies supporting unhealthy habits. Means raised concerns about positioning Ozempic, priced at $20,000 per patient, as a solution to obesity, emphasizing the need to address root causes and questioning the pharmaceutical industry’s financial interests.

Discussing the drawbacks of Ozempic on a medical level, Means highlighted reported issues such as gastrointestinal problems, stomach paralysis, and an EU probe into suicidal ideation linked to the drug. He delved into institutional corruption, pointing out that pharmaceutical companies are the largest spenders on TV news ads, foundational obesity research, and contributions to medical and civil rights groups.

Also read | Santa Barbara issues evacuation warning for upcoming storm

Means revealed that Novo Nordics, the manufacturer of Ozempic, has allegedly paid $30 million in direct bribes to obesity doctors. This information, coupled with Means’ insights, offers a comprehensive exploration of the complex connections between pharmaceutical interests, media influence, and public health concerns. The discussion raises questions about the ethical implications of financial relationships between pharmaceutical companies and influential institutions, urging a critical examination of these dynamics in the broader context of public health.