The past 2 years have given us a great deal of attention on the topic of early treatments for COVID19.
The idea that early treatments work for a respiratory virus is slightly scandalous in the eyes of mainstream medicine. Don’t believe me? Have you ever heard the expression “You can’t treat a cold?” Well, it turns out that there IS a way to treat the common cold! Because early treatments do work. That’s why so many well respected top in their specialty providers have gone all in and risked EVERYTHING to make early treatments known to the world. (Head nod to the providers at the FLCCC, America’s Frontline Doctors, Dr Tess Lawrie and the BiRD, Dr Robert Malone, especially Drs Peter McCullough and Pierre Kory and the Late Doctor Vlad Zelenko, Drs Brett Weinstein and Heather Heying and all the others that have been especially helpful in the process of spreading information on Early Treatments for COVID19.)
During the past 2 years, at the same time as an ever increasing number of doctors, PAs, APRNs and patients across the world are realizing that early treatment for COVID19 works to save lives, the most successful early treatment mechanisms have been targeted. These treatments are often inexpensive and easily accessible. Because of this, the Global Public Health media and government/ international corporate narrative has decided to view early treatment as a threat to their pharmaceutical products that are highly profitable. All contrary opinions were Silenced. The logic was something like “early treatments are a threat to the vaccines therefore we must eliminate early treatments.”
Since I was paying attention, I saw each early treatment product get attacked vehemently: Dexamethasone (which was then adapted into the treatment protocols at lower than useful dosages), budesonide, Hydroxychloroquine, Ivermectin, fluvoxamine, Aspirin, Vitamin D each had direct attacks against their efficacy or efforts to ignore or limit their use in the population, often with lies, schmears, hyperbole, paid adversarial research and full blown propaganda efforts. There are many other supplements and agents that are used and effective in reducing risks for COVID19.
This has been a concerted global attack on both the successful therapeutic interventions and the healthcare providers that speak about them or use them to save patients’ lives and help keep people out of hospitals.
Several books have been and are being written on these subjects:
The Real Anthony Fauci: Bill Gates, Big Pharma, and the Global War on Democracy and Public Health by Robert F. Kennedy Jr
Bodies of Others: The new Authoritarians: COVID19 and the War Against the Human by Naomi Wolfe
Lies my Government Told Me and the Better Future Coming by Robert Malone
COVID19 and the Global Predators: We are the Prey by Peter R. Breggin and Ginger Breggin.
I haven’t read them yet so I will hold off on commenting except to encourage you to consider looking into each.
Did you know that going into COVID19 there was already a plan in place where traditional public health policy would make available inexpensive medicines already on the market to be repurposed as needed?
The plan from the World Health Organization itself in 2015 involved published guidelines for Academic Journals and papers, pharmaceutical companies and governments to have open access to testing and research about which medications were effective early in a pandemic. We were supposed to not use patented genetic therapies and instead have an open source type approach to solve the problem. Many researchers were going to start with agents on the World Health Organization’s list of Essential Medications, which are safe, and determine from the existing research which agents were effective in helping to treat the next pandemic.
This work in fact happened, and it has been effective.
But there have been enormous efforts to squash it. The WHO plan was taken down, and is now only available on the WAYBACK Machine internet Archive.
Generic inexpensive repurposed medications that worked clinically were vilified, targeted by BAD Pharma, allied NGOs, Governments and professional organizations. Studies that showed the efficacy of generic medications that actually worked across the world were attacked zealously as were the researchers. Rigged Studies paid for by self-interest groups were created that set to disprove efficacy of early treatments. Over and over again, our Global Government health agencies demonized the already-proven demonstrably safe agents. Medical providers were told in a barrage of information from trusted sources: the FDA, the CDC, and their professional organizations that the safe and effective generic and inexpensive early treatments were not effective, and not safe.
BUT if the Main COVID19 Narrative is true, why are so many medical providers still using these early treatments despite all of the pressure to the contrary?
Because early treatment does in fact work. I know because I have used them, seen them work, have many many colleagues that I respect greatly that also use early treatments daily and have each treated hundreds to thousands of patients to great success.
Many countries adopted early treatments, and that data is profound when one looks at epidemiological adoption of early treatment protocols by State and Country Globally.
But if early treatments work why are so many medical providers vehemently opposed to using early treatments?
I believe that the answer lies in the worldview of the healthcare provider. We don’t like to admit it, but the truth is that interpretation of scientific data is heavily dependent on the worldviews of those that are doing the interpreting.
Also, it is a very stressful thing psychologically to admit that the many organizations that you as a healthcare provider trust to synthesize data and look out for the best interests of your patients have been captured by corporate and political interests: promulgating untruths, attacking effective early treatment agents, and directly threatening providers that refuse to comply, all for the express purpose of promoting International Corporate and Global Political interests at the direct cost of human life and wellness. AND if you are a provider, you may have been complicit in the actions, watching patients get sick and die (when early treatments were available) pushing only those EUA products(i.e. shots, antibody infusion, resdimivere, etc). Considering that people will radically defend their worldviews when a lot less is at stake, someone that needs for the FDA to be inviolate in these matters is going to be heavily biased when selecting which data to interpret and how it should be interpreted. Usually they will protect their worldview by refusing to look at any data except for that which is presented by said organizations.
Healthcare providers that don’t use early treatment are not doing so because they trust organizations to tell them how to practice, and do not read the totality of evidence about the matters. They therefore write off previously highly regarded providers and colleagues, really anyone and anything that threatens their worldview to protect their non scientific need to not be complicit in the alternative, and they justify the position by saying that early treatments are not scientific. HOWEVER they are actively ignoring the precautionary principles of medical ethics:
If there is little risk of harm and high potential for gain, why not try an inexpensive generic, safe medication? We are supposed to give patients informed consent and options for treatments. Those providers that do try to treat early are very quickly converted, by the fact that early treatments work and by the many unbelievable success stories of patients who call and give reports of the successes time after time.
But if providers never use early treatments, then they can continue to live in worldviews where early treatments don’t work. This worldview was fabricated and is simply not true.
Wouldn’t insurance companies want to cover inexpensive early treatments instead of expensive treatments?
As far as I know, the insurance companies did not pay for the inexpensive therapies, because the expensive therapies were often free and paid for by the federal government as part of EUA contracts. Medical providers that use treatments advised by the Global Public Health narrative are not held responsible for harm to the patients from the products that are covered under Emergency Use Authorization, but if they use generic and repurposed medications, the normal liability remains. This gives enormous financial incentives to NOT use early therapies for COVID19, and instead follow the FDA politicized COVID19 medical Narrative.
This still did not stop providers.
Organizations have formed all over the World, and consist of Medical providers, Nurses, APRNs, PAs and others that often face censorship, and sometimes threats of legal reprisal, or loss of license if they do not stop using the early treatment protocols. But they persist. Why? Because Early treatment works.
Yesterday was World Ivermectin Day. I had a conversation with a friend who is opposed to the idea of have a global awareness day for any singular early treatment drug. His view was that we don’t need another false idol in our world. While I agree with him in more than one sense, I think that having a day to raise awareness of early Treatment for COVID19, and specifically Ivermectin and its efficacy is a worthwhile thing.
One organization I would like to draw your attention to is the Front Line Covid19 Critical Care Alliance. FLCCC started off as a team of highly qualified Medical experts in critical care from across the country that gathered their collective knowledge and developed treatment protocols early in 2020. They then expanded to Early treatment protocols, and Prophylaxis Protocols, and Vaccine Adverse Effect Protocols. Dr Pierre Kory was one of the founders of the FLCCC. The organization was so successful in getting the word out that they were directly attacked by international business in having their PayPal donations frozen at one point. (Not sure if it is still going on)
I really like the FLCCC because they do real science. They get feedback from frontline providers, incorporate UpToDate research, and communicate the updated protocols frequently. They change protocols based on evidence, as it emerges. See my post on Follow the Science. Providers in the FLCCC change the treatment protocols based on what works and incorporate current research viewed in its totality. This is the complete opposite of the Mainstream Public Health Narrative, which is stuck in LOCKDOWN, VACCINE, and EUA, BAD Pharma $$$, Comply or we will disband you from society regardless of how egregious and harmful these interventions are policies.
FLCCC Protocols (updated regularly)
Ivermectin is highly evidence based, and one of the key backbone agents that has remained in FLCCC protocols.
from https://c19ivermectin.com/ updated regularly.
Alex Berenson is a journalist, and Pierre Kory MD is the president of the FLCCC had a debate this past week. Pierre Kory is the author of The War on Ivermectin: The Early Treatment that Could have Saved the World which is going to be released in September and is on my to read list.
The vigilant Fox has created a 6 minute synopsis of Pierre Kory’s thoughts on Ivermectin.