Doctoring the Truth
Welcome to Doctoring the Truth, a podcast where two dedicated audiologists dissect the world of healthcare gone rogue. Explore jaw-dropping stories of medical malfeasance, nefariousness, and shocking breaches of trust. The episodes provide deep dives that latch onto your curiosity and conscience. It's a podcast for truth-seekers craving true crime, clinical insights, and a dash of humor.
Doctoring the Truth
Ep 11-Orange Wigs and Particle Accelerators: New Orleans' Darkest Medical Mystery (Part 2)
The brutal murder of Dr. Mary Sherman in 1964 New Orleans holds far more disturbing implications than initially meets the eye. Her partially burned body, discovered with stab wounds and inexplicable burns that experts suggest could only come from high-voltage radiation, opens a doorway into a shadowy world where medicine, government secrecy, and Cold War politics collide.
Drawing from extensive research in Edward Haslam's "Dr. Mary's Monkey," we explore the compelling theory that Sherman wasn't simply a murder victim but potentially a participant—willing or unwitting—in covert cancer research aimed at developing a biological weapon. The connections between key figures surrounding her death create an unsettling picture: David Ferrie, an eccentric pilot with intelligence connections who kept an apartment full of cancer-infected mice; Lee Harvey Oswald, whose phone number appeared in Sherman's address book; and a network of scientists working on the fringes of ethical medicine.
Most chilling is the timeline proposed by researchers: just months before Sherman's death, a team allegedly tested cancer-causing viruses on unwitting prisoners, confirmed their effectiveness, and then systematically removed evidence from Sherman's apartment. Whether she died from an experiment gone wrong or because she knew too much remains uncertain, but the pattern of secrecy is unmistakable.
The ramifications extend beyond one unsolved murder. We discuss how government-sponsored unethical experiments like the Tuskegee syphilis study did occur during this era, making these theories impossible to dismiss outright. Perhaps most concerning is the potential connection to the polio vaccine program, where monkey viruses like SV40 contaminated early vaccines, raising questions about long-term public health consequences that continue to echo today.
This case forces us to confront uncomfortable questions: What price are we willing to pay for medical progress? When does national security override ethical considerations? And most importantly, who ensures transparency when powerful interests prefer secrets remain buried? Sherman's story serves as a stark reminder that vigilance and accountability must accompany scientific advancement, especially when human lives hang in the balance.
Primary Source:
"Dr. Mary's Monkey: How the Unsolved Murder of a Doctor, a Secret Laboratory in New Orleans and Cancer-Causing Monkey Viruses are Linked to Lee Harvey Oswald, the JFK Assassination and Emerging Global Epidemics," by Edward T. Haslam, Updated Edition, copyright 2014.
Don't miss a (heart) beat! Check out our Instagram @doctoringthetruthpodcast and email us your Medical Mishaps at doctoringthetruth@gmail.com. Join us on Facebook at Doctoring the Truth, and TikTok @doctoring the truth. Don't forget to download, rate, and review so we can keep bringing you more exciting content each week!
Stay safe, and stay suspicious...trust, after all, is a delicate thing!
Don't forget to check out these fantastic discounts from our sponsors:
20% Off Strong Coffee Company
https://strongcoffeecompany.com/discount/STAYSUSPICIOUS
41% Off Cozy Earth:
https://cozyearth.com/discount/STAYSUSPICIOUS
Hello, hello, hello, hello. How are you? I am fabulous, how are you? You know what?
Speaker 2:This morning was freezing out. It was. It was colder than a witch's hoo-ha. But tonight the sun is out. It's beautiful. But I will tell you I do have my blinds in my window. That's in front of my recording desk at half mast, because last week I was caught actually saying squirrel and then interrupting the whole thing and losing track of what we were talking about so, yeah, yeah, that did happen, didn't it? We should just let everyone know. I mean, adhd is a thing, something shiny.
Speaker 2:But I'm also trying to curtail it a little bit just for the sake of the pod. But yeah, so do you have any plans for the spring? Do you guys grow stuff? Do you like to putz around outside or hike?
Speaker 1:well, dog we did have a garden when we lived in mankato before, and our new house came with a wildflower garden and a large raised bed garden. The people that lived here before us didn't take very good care of the garden in the fall time, so there's like old vegetable carcasses out there. But whatever, let's get fertilizer maybe. Yeah, so, um, definitely I'm so excited to get my flower planters going. Oh yeah, I have been patiently waiting for the garden centers to open, and on Monday was that just yesterday I drove to a place that I see a kiddo at and I happened to go past Home Depot to go there and they had the flowers out. So probably this weekend I'm going to go buy a ton of flowers and do my pots.
Speaker 2:Yes, there's nothing like a planter. I'm a big fan of a planter, and when those garden centers open, it's time to break out open-toe season for real.
Speaker 1:Yes, we're also super excited. The the yard came with those gardens, which is interesting, but they never did any landscaping, so we have just like a fresh slate. So we get to like buy trees and shrubs and ah, I'm so excited yeah, that's so cool.
Speaker 2:And then you know, a few years from now you'd be like, oh, remember when we print, we planted that little thing and we brought it home in our car and now it's like 15 feet tall. Yes, I'm so excited. That is cool.
Speaker 1:How about you? Do you have anything you want to share?
Speaker 2:I mean, every year I have to do a bumper crop of basil because I have to make pesto. I love it so much, pesto, I love it so much. Um, but this year I really, you know, what I love is like when summer's over and you've, like, your tomatoes are beyond, and and all this, the herbs and stuff, I like to be able to go out and discover a zucchini the size of a toddler, you know, and so because they come out a little bit later and I forget about them. So I think this year we're going to go back to squash, we're going to go back to squash land and and maybe some pumpkins too, because, yeah, um, we live on kind of a a little area that, you know, right down from our house dips into a ravine, down to a river, and so we like to go, we do our little pumpkin thing and then, when they're beyond, we do pumpkin bowling oh my gosh fun get it down, down the road into.
Speaker 2:I mean, it's the little things in life, right?
Speaker 1:so we need more pumpkins for our pumpkin bowling I love that, yeah, and also can confirm that your pesto is chef's kiss. I would like to dip a little baby.
Speaker 2:thank you, if this podcast doesn't work out, I'm just gonna start pesto business. You should, or maybe we could, market my pesto as, like Dr Nina Truth pesto, I don't know.
Speaker 1:I don't know what I would have to bring to the table other than confirming that it's delicious.
Speaker 2:Yeah, I guess murder isn't really appetizing to your crime and health care, but anyway, not everything can match or make sense. That's what makes life beautiful. Beautiful. Oh, I do have a correction section uh. Last week, like I said, I'm probably on FBI list um to watch Uh, but I had searched what it takes to burn a body and um, I said it took 600 to 2,000 degrees. This is really exciting, but no, it's 1,600 is what I meant to say. 1,600 to 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit for several hours, and that's a recipe to burn a body.
Speaker 1:So just want to make sure everybody knows that. So hopefully none of you actually need to know that, but just some food for thought.
Speaker 2:So, yeah, you can't just do it on your you know, broiler setting in your oven. I mean, this has got to be the real deal. So yeah, we went from like flowers and gardening to science. Um, anyway, so this week is part two Monkeys, mice and Mary, the Mysterious Murder of Dr Sherman. Um, are you ready for this?
Speaker 1:Yeah, I can't wait to see what happens.
Speaker 2:Did you re-buckle your seatbelt? Oh, hang on, I'm in. So I love that last. Thank you for that, all right in, so I'd love that last. I thank you for that, all right. Um, so information that was obtained uh, it was obtained from the same book that we talked about last week, dr mary's monkey, by edward haslam the updated edition, because he updated it like 10 years after he, I think in 2014, after he learned some new stuff. So, um, there's that, and then any remaining sources will be listed in our show notes. And then I should give a trigger warning. This episode contains information about the medical experimentation of animals, which many consider animal abuse. So just be aware, I don't go into terribly a lot of detail, but there's some disturbing details, I will say so be warned.
Speaker 2:So last week we talked about the fact that key figures in New Orleans' underground network of spies, anti-castro operatives and medical researchers may have played a role in shaping the events leading up to JFK's death. The connections are eerie and fascinating. So let's talk about some of the players here. I'm not going to talk a lot about JFK's death, but just the connections I find are surprising and fascinating. So Lee Harvey Oswald was one. He spent the summer of 1963 in New Orleans, mingling with anti-Castro groups while posing as a pro-Castro activist Ooh, double agent. His movements during this time remain suspicious and some believe intelligence agencies were manipulating him. If these theories hold any truth, it suggests that Lee Harvey Oswald was far more than a lone gunman. Instead, he may have been a patsy caught up in a web of covert operations, biological warfare experiments and CIA-backed plots.
Speaker 2:Then there's David Ferry we talked about member wig guy, orange wig guy. He's a former pilot. He had ties to both Oswald and organized crime and he was allegedly working on secret underground medical experiments. So the book describes that he had two apartments across the street from one another. One apartment was full of a thousand or more white mice with varying degrees of cancer, along with lab and medical equipment, including a linear accelerator, that particle accelerator we talked about for radiating um. The other apartment across the street was where he slept at night. I mean, I don't blame him. Would you want to sleep with thousands of?
Speaker 1:mice. No, I'm still dying over here thinking about it?
Speaker 2:um, when his apartment was searched after his sudden death in 1967, investigators reportedly found medical books, including treatises. How do you say treatises? Treatises on cancer research? So yeah, written stuff about cancer research. And then there's I don't know if you remember that Mary Sherman worked for Dr Alton Oxner. He is a respected but fiercely anti-communist physician who headed his own clinic called the Oxner Clinic, where he maintained deep connections with the government and intelligence community.
Speaker 2:But how does Mary Sherman fit into this picture? Haslam theorizes that Sherman was deeply involved in the secret cancer research project and may have died because of an experiment gone wrong or because she knew too much. Her gruesome death, with burns that some believe resulted from exposure to high voltage radiation, may have been a cover-up to conceal what really happened in her lab. And, by the way, lee Oswald's phone number was found in Mary Sherman's address book, so they definitely knew each other. And then there's Judith Vary Baker. She's a woman who later claimed to be Oswald's lover and insisted that she and Oswald were part of a secret project in New Orleans involving cancer research. She alleges that the goal was to create a biological weapon fast-acting cancer cells to assassinate foreign leaders like Castro In 1963, the young cancer researchers' specialized skills were needed to weaponize cancer for the bioweapon, and she was the one who transported the product of their cancer research to Mary Sherman's apartment for her review. According to a book that she wrote titled Me and Lee how I Came to Know, love and Lose, lee Harvey Oswald.
Speaker 2:On August 28th 1963, the Reverend Dr Martin Luther King Jr delivered his I have a Dream speech in Washington DC during the Civil Rights March. The CORE Congress of Racial Equality had planned voter registration drives for Blacks across the country for the following day, august 29, 1963. So the highly segregated Clinton Louisiana was one of the sites targeted by the CORE office in Baton Rouge. After a summer of killing mice and monkeys with their cancerous cocktails, it was time to test the concoction on a human. On Thursday, august 29th, clay Shaw drove David Ferry, lee Oswald and the bioweapon to Jackson, louisiana. There they would need to get past the guards and fences surrounding the East Louisiana State Mental Hospital a facility for the criminally insane. Louisiana State Mental Hospital a facility for the criminally insane to inject the bioweapon into specially selected quote volunteer end quote prisoners. So methinks it's more like volunforced yeah, voluntold to be my prisoner.
Speaker 2:Right Voluntold to be my experiment victim. The problem was this was going to be difficult, since the prisoner, or prisoners, were still in nearby Angola Penitentiary and needed to be transferred to the hospital in Jackson. Jackson, louisiana, is a tiny town where a black Cadillac might just attract unwanted attention to the men transporting the bioweapon. Clinton Louisiana, however, was just down the road from Jackson and was a slightly larger town with a courthouse where cars such as their fancy black Cadillac were commonly parked by lawyers, judges and politicians. So it was here that Clay Shaw planned to wait for a phone call that said that the prisoner had left Angola and was en route to the hospital in Jackson, and was en route to the hospital in Jackson. Once the prisoner had left, shaw would proceed to Jackson to rendezvous with the van from Angola so that he could follow it onto the mental hospital grounds, as if his black caddy was part of the official convoy from Angola.
Speaker 2:What Shaw and his buddies expected to find in Clinton that day was an empty square in front of a small town courthouse on a hot, humid August afternoon. What they found instead, however, was a crowded square with a bunch of angry whites watching unwanted Black voter registration drive, with the town's marshal surveying the scene. They had driven into the center of a hotbed of civil rights activity with everyone watching. Finally, the payphone rang. Shaw got his call and the caddy headed to the hospital in Jackson where someone from the group injected the prisoner slash prisoners it was never clear it was more than one person with the cancer weapon.
Speaker 2:Once that was done, shaw's team started the long drive back to New Orleans To determine if the bioweapon had been effective. A blood test would need to be conducted 48 hours later, and not just any blood test, it was a blood titration test that only a few people in the country even knew how to perform. And guess what? One of these people was Judah Ferry Baker, lee Oswald's girlfriend. So two days later, at 11 am on August 31st 1963, lee Harvey Oswald began driving Judith Ferry Baker from New Orleans to Jackson, Louisiana, so Judith could perform the blood tests on the prisoners slash prisoners to confirm that the cancer cocktail had kicked in and it had. At the end of the day, lee dropped Judith off at her house at 1032 Marengo Street at 10 pm, and this was the end of Judith's involvement with the project, which had proven itself by this time. And remember how I mentioned last week that Mary's apartment was burgled like a month or so before her murder.
Speaker 1:Yes.
Speaker 2:So the same night that Lee dropped Judith off at her house, around 11 pm, someone pried open the door to Mary Sherman's apartment. But Mary was not there. Earlier that day she'd flown to London where she stayed for a month. The burglar removed thousands of dollars of property from her apartment. Okay, so the development phase of the bioweapon was over. Mary left the country before Judith performed the blood testing for cancer and by the time the day was over, the evidence that might have linked Mary to the project had been stolen from her apartment. All of her medical equipment had been removed from her apartment. A heavyset Cuban-looking man had been seen near the area and the net effect was that evidence connecting Mary Sherman to the bioweapon plot had been sanitized.
Speaker 2:So was Mary Sherman an innocent scientist caught up in a deadly conspiracy? Was Lee Harvey Oswald a pawn in a much larger game? And did the medical experiments in New Orleans play a role in one of the greatest political assassinations of all time? One thing is for certain the deeper you dig, the stranger the story becomes. One of the most significant impacts of Dr Mary's Monkey the book is how it reinforces skepticism towards official government narratives. Towards official government narratives, the idea that intelligence agencies may have been involved in secret medical experiments or that they could cover up. Something as shocking as Sherman's alleged high-voltage radiation injuries feeds into long-standing fears about what the government isn't telling us.
Speaker 2:In an era, I know right. In an era when classified documents continue to be released about Cold War operations, the CIA's involvement in biological research and even new details on JFK's assassination, haslam's book reminds readers that those in power often write history. The more secrets that are uncovered, the more people question the official record, question the official record. The book also raises unsettling questions about medical experimentation and the ethics of scientific research. The 20th century is littered with examples of unethical medical studies, from the Tuskegee syphilis experiment to MKUltra, the CIA's mind control program. If Haslam's claims are even partially true, it suggests that researchers may have conducted risky, unregulated experiments in the name of national security. And now it's time for a getting better at it.
Speaker 2:Welcome to the chart notes segment, where we learn something about what's happening or what's happened in medicine and healthcare. So I wanted to know. I knew about MKUltra and we could do a whole episode on that, or theories really, but I didn't know about the Tuskegee syphilis experiment. So I looked into that and the Tuskegee syphilis experiment was an unethical clinical study conducted in the United States between 1932 and 1972 by the US Public Health Service and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Tuskegee, alabama. The study aimed to observe the natural progression of untreated syphilis in an African American men without their informed consent. Can you believe this?
Speaker 2:This is documented this isn't conspiracy, this is a fact, this is unfortunate fact. Yeah, yeah. So the study involves 600 African, 600 African American men. That's so many.
Speaker 1:For one experiment that they didn't tell any of them what's going on.
Speaker 2:That's a lot. Yeah, it makes me so sad because you know they were considered less than and so they just didn't have to. I don't know.
Speaker 1:Well, my mind didn't even go there, I just was like holy cats, 600 people.
Speaker 2:But yeah, you're right 600 people let alone, but 600, they probably paid them or something, and given the demographics and those who were fortunate versus those who were not, I mean anyway, so 399 had syphilis and 201 did not. That was the control group, so they were given syphilis. By the way, they didn't just show up to the study.
Speaker 1:That's what I was in my head. I'm like how do they know they had syphilis?
Speaker 2:No, no, no.
Speaker 2:They gave them syphilis Of course they did 399 of these 600 men syphilis and 201 was the control group out of this group of 600. The participants were never informed that they had syphilis, but they were told they were beating, being treated for bad blood, which is a very vague term, and even after penicillin was discovered as an effective treatment in 1943. So if you let me just back up this, the study started in 1932, and went on until 1972. Oh my gosh, 40 years, I know. So in 1943, they had a solution and effective treatment, but the researchers didn't provide it to the participants or even inform them about it. The study continued for 40 years, during which many of these participants died, infected their spouses and passed congenital syphilis to their children.
Speaker 1:That's so sad. I'm also thinking like if this treatment came out in 1943, you could at least not be an asshole to the extreme and make a third group and do research at least on how the treatment works right, that's not what their interest was, I suppose I mean this is murder, right I mean?
Speaker 2:so I can't believe this happened. So in 1972 the experiment was exposed by the media, leading to public outrage, and rightly so. Um and its immediate termination. In 1973, the us government was sued and an out-of-court settlement. Don't you just love the out-of-court settlements where they don't have to admit guilt and we don't know what the financial compensation is but there was financial compensation to the victims and their families. I mean, I'm sure that really helped, you know, with those who lost loved ones over this not to mention those who suffered and the kids who grew up with congenital sickness.
Speaker 2:So I mean it's unbelievable, it's like made up but yet it happened and it's out. There know court records and whatnot. But in 1997 president bill clinton issued an official, an official public apology to the survivors on behalf of the us government again.
Speaker 2:I'm sure they felt really great after that I mean, it's something I mean, but yeah, um, this experiment became a symbol of medical racism and ethical misconduct in science, leading to significant reforms in medical research, including the Belmont Report and the establishment of institutional review boards IRBs. So tiny silver lining that there was some positive changes after this. But why did it have to take this? I mean, we're not talking about a couple. A couple people would have been bad enough. Yeah hundreds.
Speaker 1:Yeah, oh my gosh um.
Speaker 2:So the tuskegee syphilis experiment had a lasting impact on the african-american community's trust in the uS healthcare system, which influences attitudes towards medical research, clinical trials and vaccinations, and we see that to this day. Yeah, I could see that. Could we do a whole series? We could do a whole series I'm asking myself a rhetorical question in my notes here. But we could do a whole series on the MKUltra mind control experiments, but there are plenty of documentaries and podcasts out there if you're interested in in my notes here. But we could do a whole series on the MK Ultra Mind Control Experiments.
Speaker 2:But there are plenty of documentaries and podcasts out there if you're interested in learning more about the whole horrific, exploitative torture of unsuspecting and innocent people in the name of advancing intelligence. So deep breath, ugh, yeah, I hate it, yeah. Then there's the potential contamination of the polio vaccine with SV40, a monkey virus that some suspect could be linked to cancer, which is especially alarming and it forces us to ask how much do we know about the medicine we take? Has scientific advancements come at a hidden cost? Could other unethical experiments still be happening today under the guise of national security?
Speaker 1:I would say yes.
Speaker 2:Back to the case. While the scientific community continues to debate the SB40 controversy, dr Mary's monkey left a lasting impact by keeping these concerns alive in public discourse. Monkeys have played a critical role in medical research for decades, contributing to some of the most important breakthroughs in vaccines, neuroscience and disease treatment. But as science has advanced, so have the ethical debates surrounding the use of primates in labs. During the mid-20th century, monkeys played a crucial role in the development of the polio vaccine. Researchers, including Dr Jonas Salk and Dr Albert Sabine, used rhesus monkey kidney cells to grow the polio virus and develop an effective vaccine. This was a major victory for public health, virtually eradicating polio in much of the world. At the same time, primates were also being used in cancer research, radiation studies and even covert government projects. According to Dr Mary's, monkey secret experiments in New Orleans involved infecting monkeys with cancer-causing viruses, allegedly as part of an effort to understand how cancer spreads and to possibly weaponize it. As we've talked about, the simian virus SV40, which contaminated some batches of the polio vaccine in the 1950s, later became a controversial topic, with some scientists questioning whether it contributed to human cancer cases. Haslam makes a compelling connection between this virus, the polio vaccine and the cancer research that Dr Sherman was allegedly conducting. He suggests that the SV40 virus, which was carried by monkeys used to grow the vaccine, may have played a role in triggering cancer in humans, leading to a cancer epidemic decades later. While this remains a controversial theory, haslam ties the SV40 contamination directly to the monkey research conducted by Sherman and her colleagues. He argues that the CIA and other government agencies were not only using monkeys for cancer research, but they were also experimenting with the very viruses that might end up contaminating vaccines. The larger implication here is that the use of monkeys in medical research and the unregulated viral experimentation could have far-reaching consequences, leading to unforeseen health crises. This event also underscores the dangers of government-sponsored medical experimentation, where public health is sometimes compromised for political or military objectives. It raises questions about how much we truly understand about the long-term effects of medical research, especially when it involves potential contamination of everyday medical treatment like vaccines.
Speaker 2:As medical research advanced, so did ethical concerns about the use of primates in labs. By the 1960s, animal rights advocates were beginning to challenge the widespread use of monkeys in experiments, raising concerns about suffering and humane treatment. Many experiments involved high radiation exposure, surgical procedures, disease injections, often without pain relief. The author describes helping his father at work when he was in his teens and coming across the Simian Studies Lab at the hospital campus in Tulane. It held monkeys with metal plates on their heads. Their skulls had been topped off, electrodes inserted into their brains, and then the electrodes were soldered to a metal plate that was fused to the top of their heads. This way the researchers could perform experiments and measure the monkeys' brains' responses to various stimuli, drugs et cetera.
Speaker 2:I mean, wow, so the necessity of primate research? I mean, as technology improves, some scientists question whether or not primates are still essential for medical progress, especially with the development of cell cultures and computer modeling. Do we really need to be, you know, using animals and watching them suffer? Even a mouse? You, you know? Yeah, I don't like that. I know I hate it too.
Speaker 2:The long-term impact were some experiments like those described in Dr Mary's Monkey, conducted recklessly in the name of Cold War science. By the 1970s and beyond, regulations such as the Animal Welfare Act imposed stricter guidelines on the use of primates in medical research. Today the debate continues, with researchers balancing the need for scientific progress with growing calls for alternative testing methods. I mean, I get the conundrum, I get the dichotomy here. Like, we want to save humans and you know we can't use humans, as literally the phrase says guinea pigs right, so that means we can use guinea pigs? I mean, I get it.
Speaker 2:Are you going to sacrifice a guinea pig for a cure for cancer? Right, yeah, but I don't. You know what. Where's the line? So I'm not saying I have the answer to this and I'm not saying I judge this and I'm definitely not saying don't trust your vaccines. I'm just saying it's had a, a, um, a sketchy history in its origins. You know Um and who's to say. I mean, I think I've had like six COVID vaccines and I have asthma and I've gotten COVID and not died. So is it because I had the vaccines? Like, I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but I can see where, at some point, in order for us to advance to save human life, like, do we do it at the cost of animals or do we have enough technology now where we don't even have to sacrifice anything, we can protect all life and and use predictive ai and computer modeling?
Speaker 1:I don't know, it's above my pay grade, but I'm just thinking out loud, I like where your head's at though yeah, I want to save the mice, the monkeys and the humans you know, I know, I know I'm just yeah, I just can't stop thinking this is not. I'm not going to go too far into this rabbit hole, but I drive a lot for work now and every time I pass a truck full of chickens or piggies and I know they're not going for medical experience or going for butcher, but I'm just like, oh my gosh.
Speaker 2:God yeah. But I mean I love, I love me a good chicken wing, I love me bacon and it's like, but I want to cry when I see those little piggies on their way to market.
Speaker 1:Every time I pass them I have to message my friend Michaela, and I'm like Michaela I just passed a truck full of cute little piggy butts, but like I'm still going to eat bacon, like me, stopping eating them is not going to save them all I know, but if everyone said they were going to stop eating? I know that's where the trouble is the demand.
Speaker 2:I know right, but bacon is so good and I know so. Maybe the difference is you know, I don't know. You're right, we're going down a rabbit hole. Let's just decide we're hypocrites, but hopefully it's a quick death.
Speaker 1:Yes, and they don't have metal plates in their head with electrodes.
Speaker 2:And they're just like causing pain and injury and harm and then watching what happens, like I don't know. There's something sadistic almost about that in the name of science, um, and as someone who loves science, I just I don't know. I see the name, but I also think gosh, we should probably.
Speaker 2:Yeah, exactly, thank you for. Thank you for that. That's exactly what I meant to say anyway. So, um, in this book I was reading I mean, I did not bargain for this I thought I was going to get a juicy moida, maybe a little bit of voodoo. I was in a, I was in a little little dusty curio shop and off of, uh, bourbon street and uh, here we go with all this conspiracy stuff that I honestly try to avoid. But, my my God, some of this is just eye-opening, which I probably needed. So, all right, there's that.
Speaker 2:So, even though the book delves into a lot of conspiracy theories, there was a lot of. You know, what interested me were the undercurrents of the cold war, science, the government, secrecy, the intersections of the medical ethics versus espionage, um, so I wanted to look at those events in greater detail and explore their implications. So, obviously the most pivotal event, and the reason I bought the book, is the brutal murder of dr Mary Sherman in 1964. And, as we know, she was a respected orthopedic surgeon and cancer researcher and was found in her New Orleans apartment stabbed multiple times. But what makes her murder so suspicious and arguably tied to some of these larger conspiracies were the unusual burns on her body. So some experts suggested that the burns, as we talked about, could have only been caused by exposure to high-voltage radiation, and that theory points directly to her involvement in dangerous medical experiments. So the official narrative describes her death as a random act of violence, but Haslam suggests that her research into the cancer-causing viruses may have made her a target and, more chillingly, he connects her death to cover-up efforts, possibly orchestrated by powerful figures involved in a secret cancer project aimed at eliminating Castro. So Sherman's gruesome injuries, he argues, weren't just the result of a murder. They were a way to erase a trail that led straight to covert government operations. So the larger implications here are the idea that governments can be involved in weaponizing diseases for political purposes, and that raises questions about the lengths to which certain agencies might go in the name of national security. And it also highlights the potential dangers of unethical medical experimentation, where the line between research and warfare is dangerously blurred.
Speaker 2:So while much of the experimentation discussed in the book happened in the mid-20th century, this theme is still painfully relevant today. Medical research is evolving rapidly and the temptation to bend ethical guidelines in the name of finding new cures or creating breakthrough treatments is ever present. The question remains what price are we willing to pay? The ethical dilemmas of this era continue to be felt. While vaccines and cancer treatments have saved millions of lives, the shadow of early experimentation, often conducted without full transparency, raises questions about the cost of medical progress. We don't need to look far to see the ethical questions that still surround genetic research, human trials and artificial intelligence in healthcare. The legacy of unethical experiments like those described in this book remind us that vigilance is key. We must continue to ask ourselves whether our hunger for progress sometimes blinds us to the potential harm or exploitation that could occur behind the scenes.
Speaker 2:The other lingering theme in the book is government secrecy, the idea that those in power sometimes choose to hide the truth to protect national interests or, worse, to cover up the ugly consequences of their own actions, whether it's the JFK assassination, covert biological warfare or the contamination of vaccines. Haslam paints a picture of a world where secrecy is not only the norm but an active tool used to manipulate the public and hide the darker sides of government operations. It's a theme that feels particularly timely today, in an age of mass surveillance, disinformation and intelligence leaks, the idea that governments are capable of hiding dangerous truths from the public is more relevant than ever. The classified nature of research and military projects, the manipulation of narratives and the erasure of inconvenient facts still occurs today, and sometimes with real consequences. So one thing we learned from this book is that trust in our leaders and institutions must be earned and not given freely. I think it was a good reminder for that, and as citizens we have a responsibility to stay vigilant, ask questions, seek transparency and transparency and be willing to change official narratives, especially when they involve something as personal and fundamental as health care and medicine.
Speaker 2:So the chilling theory presented in Haslam's book linking cancer-causing viruses, government-sponsored experiments and Dr Mary Sherman's death forces us to think about the unseen hands that might be at play shaping our world. For many, this is uncomfortable territory. It's easier to assume that medical breakthroughs, vaccines and treatments are the result of pure altruistic science, rather than acknowledging the possibility of darker agendas tied to military or political interests. In recent years, we've seen how public health crises like the COVID-19 pandemic can be both a catalyst for change and a breeding ground for conspiracy theories. The fears and doubts about the safety of vaccines, the role of pharmaceutical companies, the influence of government agencies on public health policies are all threads that run parallel to the concerns raised in this book. So these issues remind us that the intersection of health care and government power is fraught with complications. We must tread carefully so that we can really truly separate fact from fiction, separate fact from fiction.
Speaker 2:In today's post-pandemic world, the conversation about medical ethics, transparency and science and the role of government oversight is so much more important than ever. We need to ask what systems are in place to ensure that experiments are conducted in the name of public health, don't spiral into dangerous and unethical territories, and how do we balance scientific progress with personal autonomy and individual rights? I mean, I don't have the answer to these questions, but I mean dang this, this book really, like I said I I expected kind of a uh, uh, I don't know sexy murder type thing and uh and it's made me like go all philosophical and stuff and it's kind of taken me to a dark place honestly. So rather than just reading about a mysterious murder, I started thinking about government overreach, unethical medical practices and the human cost of science gone wrong.
Speaker 2:So it just reminded me that the pursuit of knowledge must always be accompanied by ethical responsibility and that we as a society have an obligation to question, examine and hold accountable those who have power to shape our world, particularly in matters of health and medicine. This book challenged me to examine the history that we're taught more closely and question the stories that we've been told. In a world wrestling with questions about ethics and scientific progress, perhaps the most important question we can ask is what are we willing to overlook in the name of progress, and at what cost? And finally, I wanted to end with we talked about last week that I would mention individuals and groups that have been considered suspects or persons of interest in Mary Sherman's murder, and I'm going to go back to our orange-haired guy.
Speaker 1:David.
Speaker 2:Ferry. Remember, he's that eccentric pilot with alleged ties to the CIA and the anti-Castor groups. He was most frequently discussed in conspiracy theories related to her death. He was closely linked, as we know, to Lee Harvey Oswald and he was the alleged assassin of President John F Kennedy. The author of this book thought he was a suspect because, according to the conspiracy theories, dr Sherman was involved in those secret bioweapon cancer virus researches aimed at assassinating Fidel. And because Ferry was this double agent, he was involved in that and he had access to labs. His connection to the assassination his name was famously brought up during Jim Garrison Remember he was the district attorney into the the assassination of jfk garrison.
Speaker 2:Believe ferry played a role in conspiracy and while his connections to the murder of dr dr sherman have never been proven, his ties to the broader web of intrigue involving oswald and the anti-castro efforts make him a figure of suspicion in the case. And and then there's Lee Harvey Oswald, the accused assassin of JFK, who was reportedly linked to both Ferry and Sherman through various conspiracy theories, but no direct evidence has emerged to link him specifically to her death. But some theorists speculate that Dr Sherman's research might have been connected because of their connection with overthrowing Castro. So you know that he might have been involved to silence Dr Sherman, to protect this covert operation. This is speculative and there's no concrete evidence. Then there's Dr Alton Oxner, who she worked for. He was the leader of that clinic that was named after him. He's a suspect. He's often mentioned as a suspect because of his connections to government agencies involved in, specifically, biological warfare research and anti-Castro operations, and she worked for him. So her death again could have been a way to cover up her work for him. But again there's no solid evidence to suggest he was specifically involved.
Speaker 2:And then there are some who say that her murder might have involved people with whom she collaborated with in the lab. I mean, she's a cancer researcher, she worked with lots of people. She might have been involved in many dangerous and secretive experiments. So it could have been a colleague who was involved in the medical experiments. And I think, like I proposed last week, you know what, if she had an accident, a terrible, awful accident that basically disintegrated her arm during one of these experiments, and then they couldn't they couldn't let that out there, you know, it would have let the cat out of the bag and so they had to kill her because, remember, the kill was the stab, not the losing her rib cage in her arm from the burns. So you know, that could have been just somebody in the lab, could have been organized crime.
Speaker 2:I mean, obviously we're always thinking, oh, the mafia you know crime figures were involved in illicit activities during that period of time, especially related to Cuba. You know, maybe, that it was linked that way, but again, that's purely speculative. Some people believe that her death could have been related to personal issues, like a domestic dispute or personal vendetta, but there wasn't any confirmed reports that anyone had anything against her or any personal or professional conflict that would suggest that as a motive. And she was beloved, um, you know. But when we look at the brutal nature of her murder multiple stab wounds, you know they always say this could have. You know, this suggests overkill, which is typically emotionally charged motive, right, crime of passion, yeah, right, so I mean, that's it. It's an unsolved case with lots of different, interesting and yet unprovable theories, but definitely a deep dive into some of the activity around the time and some of the things that she was involved in that could have explained it.
Speaker 2:But she leaves a legacy. Whether she was a willing participant in dangerous government research or an accidental casualty, or a whistleblower who paid the ultimate price for speaking out, it's still a mystery, but what we know is that her story reflects the vulnerabilities of those who work in fields where secrecy and dangerous experimentation intersect. Her legacy serves as a warning and a call to action for those of us living in a world where such experimentation is still possible. We need to ensure that those who participate in research, whether as scientists, doctors or government agents, are held accountable to the highest ethical standard. We must also demand that those in power be transparent about their actions, especially when those actions involve the health and well-being of the public. And with that I'm going to get off my soapbox. That's a wrap.
Speaker 1:Dang girl, Let me give you a little Thank you. Thank you so much for sharing that.
Speaker 2:This one made me mad.
Speaker 1:I was mad for the monkeys, I was mad for you know that's what I was going to say Mad for so many things Right, and to not like get into the like political conspiracy theory anything, especially cause politics are a hot thing right now.
Speaker 2:Yeah, um, and I want, I just want to say this is not political at all in terms of like. Nowadays, I'm honestly just reading the facts as they were presented in the book. Listen, she was, she was just at a bookstore, y'all.
Speaker 1:She thought this was just gonna be a murder book and happened upon all of this stuff. Um, so, with that, uh, and staying away from the political parts, uh, at the end of the day, poor mary sherman, I, it's the stabbing for me, because the idea of it being an accident, like oh shit, we got to cover this up. That made sense to me. But like, why are we stabbing her multiple times?
Speaker 2:well, because, well, the what I, what makes the most sense to me is that they wanted it to look like a psycho, came in and murdered her so let's say, I know you guys, but her upper extremities are melted off but she wasn't dead.
Speaker 2:That didn't kill her. That happened first and it didn't kill her. What killed her was a stab to the heart and that was the only stab wound that happened while she was alive. All of the other stabs were done post-mortem and you know that, because when you know they do the autopsy, you know they didn't bleed. Yeah, because she was dead.
Speaker 1:The heart wasn't pumping.
Speaker 2:I just like this, like, okay, we're gonna make it look like someone burgled your house and stabbed you, but like they're just gonna over overlook this arm situation and your ribcube. Well, I mean, if, yeah, I think they had to do something, yeah, yeah, and that's why they set them the pathetic little bit of clothes and mattress on fire, as if that was gonna disintegrate your arm. You know, I think they were hoping that the police would just be like oh house fire doctor, yeah stabbing in a house fire.
Speaker 1:Yeah, well, it's a shame it was never solved. And no justice for mary sherman, right, yeah, really. Well, that was rip mary. I'm hot, I can see why that had to be a two-pata you did a great job with your research.
Speaker 1:Well, thank you, yes and uh, so we can end on something different. We do have a medical mishap to share. Yay, bring it. This medical mishap was sent in by Cheryl, and Cheryl writes.
Speaker 1:As a parent, you always know your kid is going to get into some trouble. But my youngest son's stunt took it to a whole new level at our house. Uh-oh, he had come home from school one day all excited to tell me about a genius idea he had come up with to jump off the roof into an inflatable pool, but that he would also use a parachute for extra flair. Naturally, I asked if he was out of his mind and advised my sweet young son that this was a horrible idea. But I'm just a mom. No experience, no life experience, what do I know? On a sunday afternoon I heard a thumping on the roof, and it wasn't until I heard a splash soon after in the backyard that I realized it was him who was on the roof and jumped off, just as he said he wanted to oh no, he did in fact make it into the pool, however.
Speaker 1:He landed awkwardly on the edge of it and twisted his ankle. I was by his side in what felt like an instant and he was cautiously laughing. But when he tried to stand up the laughing stopped and I knew it was serious. His ankle was swollen and started to turn purple already and he couldn't put weight on it. We took him to the ER and they confirmed that he had fractured his ankle and he ended up with a cast. He had told the doctor that his parachute plan was way cooler in theory. Of course, I was mortified that my son still went through with his master plan, but again, I'm just a mom.
Speaker 2:What do I know?
Speaker 1:I'd like to think that he listened to he listens to my advice much closer since that incident.
Speaker 2:Oh man, cheryl, I hope so, but you know what kids will be kids, kids are gonna get right. He just wanted to be a superhero, so bad. No, when you're less is hard, easy. He's probably gonna end up being like a pilot or mountain climber or something. Definitely, oh my gosh, thank you for sending that in.
Speaker 1:I love that, I do.
Speaker 2:So, Amanda, what can our listeners expect to hear next?
Speaker 1:week. Next week we are going to be going all the way back to the early 1900s to cover another quack doctor. Or was she Tune in next week to hear all about it?
Speaker 2:I can't wait. I love old-timey stories.
Speaker 1:I know it's a good one. All right, so until then, don't miss a beat. All right, so until then, don't miss a beat. Subscribe or follow Doctoring the Truth wherever gmail, and be sure to follow us on instagram at doctoring the truth podcast um. Sidebar. You may have already seen I know some of you have followed our new instagram page. Um, it's now doctoring the truth podcast on instagram. We had to make a separate login because what I did first was just log in, like make one through mine. You know how y'all can do that, so I didn't have to log in and out every time. Well, that didn't work for us, so I had to make a new one. Um, and I'm still need to like transition everything to there, whatever Long story short, it's doctoring the truth podcast. Find us there, um. Same. Find us there um. Same. Thing's gonna happen with the facebook, so stay tuned for that. And also don't forget to download, rate and review so we can be sure to bring you more content next week. Until then, stay safe and stay suspicious suspicious okay, goodbye.
