Total Pageviews

Sunday, February 27, 2022

WHAT THE HECK IS BILL SAYING?

 Bill Gates is saddened by the fact that the Omicron variant is doing a better job than all the vaccines have done so far, and I might add, injuring and killing fewer people by far.  The far less dangerous Omicron virus is providing solid immunity, as it spreads, like lightening, all over the world, and that without destroying the world economy.  One might be inclined to think that the fact that we have more vaccines in stock than we have a demand for, according to Bill, could make a businessman like him sad because these vaccines have a short shelf live, which means that not too long from now they must be destroyed, at a loss.  What a bummer!

A genuine human would be delighted that Omicron is the best vaccine of all, medically and economically speaking.  it serves all equally without any costs associated with it.  It serves the poor countries with the same free immunity, as it does the rich ones.  A little while back, Dr. John Day said that the Omicron virus is the best vaccine out there, and Bill Gates seems to agree with him.  What a twist this is.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XNc9PqIZ31M

As I said before, the truth will always find it's way to the light of day.

 

 

 

 

Thursday, February 10, 2022

"The Truth Exposed with Dr. Peter McCullough"


"The Truth Exposed with Dr. Peter McCullough"

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=US343EgQ0FU

By watching this video one will learn the following.

Note: VAERS stands for Vaccine Adverse Reporting System by HHS.gov.  (Health and Human Services)

200 Million vaccinations resulted in 1 million adverse reactions causing injuries that is 1 in 200, or 0.5%.  Ref. https://vaers.hhs.gov/

20,000 killed so far by the vaccines.  Ref. https://vaers.hhs.gov/

40,000 permanently disabled.

Due to gross under-reporting by agencies, the number killed by these vaccines, according to some sources, could be a high as 180,000.

Apparently, Vaers' records reflect under-reporting, by a factor between 4 and 5, according to some it is 20-fold.  One thing is clear official counts are understated, the question is at what factor?

50% die within hours, while 80% die within a week of vaccination.

All prior vaccines throughout history combined caused only about 150 deaths.

Current vaccines install the production of Spike Proteins.

The vaccine produced Spike Proteins can cause Blood-Clots, as experienced by some.

Spike Proteins can aid in the formation of cancers.

Heart infections are now 400 per Million (CDC reports about 21,000)

WHO now advises against Booster Shots.

It is likely that ultimately the brain will be most affected, in the future.

95% of all hospitalizations were avoidable.

VAERS has about 4 to 5 times under-reporting, some claim a 20 fold factor.


Who is Peter McCullough MD, MPH?

Taken from Wikipedia:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_A._McCullough

"Early life and education

Peter Andrew McCullough was born in Buffalo, New York, on December 29, 1962.[7] He earned a Bachelor of Science degree from Baylor University in 1984 and his medical degree from the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in 1988.[8] He completed his residency in internal medicine at the University of Washington in Seattle, a cardiology fellowship in 1991, and practiced internal medicine in Grayling, Michigan, for two years before enrolling in the University of Michigan School of Public Health, earning a master of public health (MPH) degree in 1994.[7][9]

Career

After receiving his MPH, McCullough was a cardiovascular fellow at William Beaumont Hospital in the Detroit metropolitan area until 1997. He then worked successively at the Henry Ford Heart and Vascular Institute in Detroit until 2000, served as section chief of cardiology of the University of Missouri–Kansas City School of Medicine, and returned to William Beaumont Hospital where he worked from 2002 to 2010.[7] He spent the next four years as chief academic and scientific officer of the St. John Providence Health System, Detroit, before joining the Baylor University Medical Center in 2014.[7][9] McCullough entered into a confidential separation agreement with Baylor Scott & White Medical Center in February 2021. In July, in response to his promotion of misinformation about COVID-19, Baylor sued McCullough to stop him from associating himself with Baylor.[10][11][5]

McCullough is a founder and current president of the Cardio Renal Society of America[9][12] and co-editor-in-chief of the society's journal, Cardiorenal Medicine[13] and editor of the journal Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine.[14][15] He has conducted several studies on running and heart disease,[16] and co-described the term Phidippides cardiomyopathy, a heart condition found in some high endurance athletes.[17][18][19] Other research has included the relationship between heart disease and kidney disease[20] and risk factors for heart disease.[21] He is a member of the conservative advocacy group Association of American Physicians and Surgeons.[22][3]

COVID-19

During the COVID-19 pandemic, McCullough advocated for early treatment including hydroxychloroquine,[23][24] criticized the response of the National Institutes of Health and the Food and Drug Administration,[23] dissented from public health recommendations, and contributed to COVID-19 misinformation.[25][26][27]

Early outpatient treatment advocacy

In April 2020, McCullough led a study of the medication hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for COVID-19 for the Baylor Scott & White Medical Center. McCullough told The Wall Street Journal that the urgency of the public health crisis justified compromises on best practices in medical research.[28][29] In July, after major studies found hydroxychloroquine was ineffective against COVID-19 and the Food and Drug Administration revoked its emergency use authorization (EUA), McCullough supported a second EUA.[23]

McCullough, Harvey Risch of the Yale School of Public Health, and co-authors published an observational study proposing an early outpatient treatment regimen for COVID-19 in August 2020 in the American Journal of Medicine.[30] Based on previous evidence, the article made recommendations for treating ambulatory COVID-19 patients, but presented no new evidence. The article was shared on social media, mainly by groups which had previously published COVID-19 misinformation, in posts falsely interpreting the publication as an endorsement of hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for COVID-19.[31][32][33] The Ministry of Health of Brazil endorsed the article on its website, contributing to a severe COVID-19 misinformation problem in Brazil.[31][34][35] The article was criticized in letters to the editors;[36][37][38][39][40] the editors responded that the article included some "hopeful speculations...What seemed reasonable last summer based on laboratory experiments has subsequently been shown to be untrue."[32][35]

McCullough and Risch were two of three witnesses called by committee chair Senator Ron Johnson to testify before a United States Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs hearing on COVID-19 treatments held in November 2020. McCullough testified in support of social distancing, vaccination, and treatments, including hydroxychloroquine. Ashish Jha, dean of the Brown University School of Public Health, called to testify by the ranking member, said the "clear consensus in the medical and scientific community, based on overwhelming evidence" is that hydroxychloroquine is ineffective as a treatment for COVID-19. McCullough said Jha was promoting misinformation and Jha's opposition to the drug was "reckless and dangerous for the nation."[24][41][42][43] Jha responded on The New York Times opinion page, "By elevating witnesses who sound smart but endorse unfounded therapies, we risk jeopardizing a century's work of medical progress."[44]

COVID-19 misinformation

Some of McCullough's public statements contributed to the spread of COVID-19 misinformation.[4][5]

McCullough testified before a committee of the Texas Senate in March 2021, posted to YouTube by the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, in which he made false claims about COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccines, including that people under 50 years of age and survivors do not need the vaccine and that there is no evidence of asymptomatic spread of COVID-19.[25]

Posted on the Canadian online video sharing platform Rumble, McCullough gave an interview in April 2021 to The New American, the magazine of the right-wing John Birch Society, in which he advanced anti-vaccination messaging, including falsely claiming tens of thousands of fatalities attributed to the COVID-19 vaccines.[45] In May 2021, McCullough gave an interview in which he made claims about COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccines which were "inaccurate, misleading and/or unsupported by evidence", including that survivors cannot be re-infected and so do not require vaccination and that the vaccines are dangerous.[26]

During television appearances, McCullough has contradicted public health recommendations, including when asked about the aggressive spread of COVID-19 among children, by suggesting that healthy persons under 30 had no need for a vaccine,[27][46] and when asked about the relative merits of vaccination-induced immunity versus "natural" (survivor) immunity, by disputing the necessity of vaccinations to achieve herd immunity.[4][22][47][48]"

It appears that the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution is universally ignored, in order to punish law abiding Citizens for expressing their opinions.  This is not what the founding fathers had in mind!  Moreover, it is more and more apparent that he was and is still right.

 


Monday, February 7, 2022

TO IVERMECTIN OR NOT... THAT IS THE QUESTION

 It seems, there are doctors that tell their patients, for one reason or another that the drug Ivermectin should not be used for the treatment of COVID-19 because it is a neurotoxin for humans and should therefore be avoided.  As usual, one can find many partially conflicting writings on this subject, and I thought, now is the time to examine this issue.

"Ivermectin

Mark G. Papich DVM, MS, DACVCP, in Papich Handbook of Veterinary Drugs (Fifth Edition), 2021

Pharmacology and Mechanism of Action

Ivermectin is an antiparasitic drug of the avermectin class. It is a prototype for this class of antiparasitic agents, which also includes eprinomectin and milbemycins (milbemycin and moxidectin). These drugs are macrocyclic lactones and share many similarities, including mechanism of action. These drugs are neurotoxic to parasites by potentiating glutamate-gated chloride ion channels in parasites. Paralysis and death of the parasite are caused by increased permeability to chloride ions and hyperpolarization of nerve cells. These drugs also potentiate other chloride channels, including ones gated by GABA. Mammals ordinarily are not affected because they lack glutamate-gated chloride channels, and there is a lower affinity for other mammalian chloride channels. Because these drugs ordinarily do not penetrate the blood–brain barrier, GABA-gated channels in the CNS of mammals are not affected. Ivermectin is active against intestinal parasites, mites, bots, heartworm microfilaria, and developing larvae. Ivermectin can also produce heartworm adulticide effects when administered long term. Ivermectin has no effect on trematode or cestode parasites.

Ivermectin has a prolonged half-life in all the animals studied, which allows for infrequent administration to achieve clinical effects."  Emphasis added.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/veterinary-science-and-veterinary-medicine/ivermectin 

I take this to mean that ordinarily, Ivermectin is not a neurotoxin to Mammals, which includes also the human species.   Other writers say that Ivermectin in high doses might become a neurotoxin for humans, but stress that this is not the case with doctor prescribed doses, whereby Ivermectin does not cross the brain barrier, and is successfully removed from the Central Nervous System (CNS).


"Whom to believe

The politicians and heads of public health agencies have pledged to “follow the science.” Are they following the science when it comes to ivermectin and other off-label drugs? Whom should you believe?

According to many, the battle against ivermectin is because of federal restrictions contained in the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) regulations. They prohibit new, not fully tested drugs from use if there are other “adequate, approved and available alternatives.” Big pharma would rather sell you $3,000 per dose remdesivir than $1-2 ivermectin, fluvoxamine, or hydroxychloroquine.

Daniel Horowitz said of ivermectin: “to suggest that it is not safe is a scandalous lie.” He went on: “precisely at the time when the shots are wearing off, the FDA not only quasi-approved the vaccine, but picked the leakiest of all to greenlight and also authorized emergency use of a third shot … of the same failed substance.”"

https://www.clarkcountytoday.com/news/battle-over-whom-to-believe-about-ivermectin/

 

"Over 25 Years of Clinical Experience With Ivermectin: An Overview of Safety for an Increasing Number of Indications"

  • PMID: 26954318

"Abstract

Although the broad-spectrum anti-parasitic effects of the avermectin derivative ivermectin are well documented, its anti-inflammatory activity has only recently been demonstrated. For over 25 years, ivermectin has been used to treat parasitic infections in mammals, with a good safety profile that may be attributed to its high affinity to invertebrate neuronal ion channels and its inability to cross the blood-brain barrier in humans and other mammals. Numerous studies report low rates of adverse events, as an oral treatment for parasitic infections, scabies and head lice. Ivermectin has been used off-label to treat diseases associated with Demodex mites, such as blepharitis and demodicidosis. New evidence has linked Demodex mites to rosacea, a chronic inflammatory disease. Ivermectin has recently received FDA and EU approval for the treatment of adult patients with inflammatory lesions of rosacea, a disease in which this agent has been shown to be well tolerated. After more than 25 years of use, ivermectin continues to provide a high margin of safety for a growing number of indications based on its anti-parasitic and anti-inflammatory activities."   Emphasis added.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26954318/

This author also states that "... its [Ivermectin] inability to cross the blood-brain barrier in humans and other mammals.", makes Ivermectin safe.  The belief that Ivermectin is a Neurotoxin for humans, without heavy overdosing appears to be without foundation in fact.

 

"Clinical applications of topical ivermectin in dermatology

Affiliations
  • PMID: 28329606

"Abstract

Ivermectin (IVM) is a broad-spectrum anti-parasitic drug with significant anti-inflammatory properties. The emergence of treatment resistance to lindane, permethrin, and possibly malathion complicates the global strategy for management of common parasitic skin diseases such as scabies and head lice. In this regard. IVM [Ivermectin] has been safely and effectively used in the treatment of these common human infestations. In addition, IVM may be useful in inflammatory cutaneous disorders such as papulopustular rosacea where demodex may play a role in pathogenesis. Herein, we review the current applications of topical IVM in dermatology."  Emphasis added.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28329606/ 

No mention of Ivermectin being a Neurotoxin.

 

"Ivermectin Treatment in Patients With Onchocerciasis-associated Epilepsy (OAETREAT)"

It is my understanding that Ivermectin is very helpful for children who suffer Epileptic seizures.

"Can ivermectin cause neurological problems?

Ivermectin can also cause human neurotoxicity by interacting with inhibitory GABA receptors in the brain. Fortunately, ivermectin taken at therapeutic doses does not effectively cross the blood-brain barrier because it is pumped out of the CNS by the P-glycoprotein (P-gp) transporter.  Nov 23, 2021"  Emphasis added.
 
 

 THE BIG LIE? ... The song the FDA sings.

"There seems to be a growing interest in a drug called ivermectin for the prevention or treatment of COVID-19 in humans. Certain animal formulations of ivermectin such as pour-on, injectable, paste, and "drench," are approved in the U.S. to treat or prevent parasites in animals. For humans, ivermectin tablets are approved at very specific doses to treat some parasitic worms, and there are topical (on the skin) formulations for head lice and skin conditions like rosacea.

However, the FDA has received multiple reports of patients who have required medical attention, including hospitalization, after self-medicating with ivermectin intended for livestock."

https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consumer-updates/why-you-should-not-use-ivermectin-treat-or-prevent-covid-19 

We know for a fact that Ivermectin is an FDA approved drug, save for humans in a number of applications.  It is also used off-label by Doctors if in their judgement it is justified.  So why this theatrics by the FDA?  For one, about 70% of their operating budget comes from Big Pharma, and who wants to bite the hand that feeds them?  Big Pharma currently scores big profits with their nearly useless experimental COVID vaccines.  These rushed vaccines got their emergency use authorization only by denying the fact that other helpful drugs were available.  For this reason, they had to malign any other drug found effective against the COVID VIRUS.  Get it?

It is a really amazing feat to have all Hospitals and most Doctors all fall in line to support the Big Lie of Big Pharma.  While the vaccine development and trials were ongoing for months, innocent sick patients were sent home, apparently, without any treatments of any kind, including drugs like Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin.  Apparently, nor were they educated about the importance of Vitamin D3, Zinc and others.  I read some time ago that apparently 80% of people who lost the battle, were Vitamin D3 deficient.  In the final analysis, by acting as they did, the Medical Industrial Complex is responsible for the deaths of many, many thousands.  Many countries are complicit in this human and economic tragedy going on to this day.

 

"Therapeutic Advances:

A large majority of randomized and observational controlled trials of ivermectin are reporting repeated, large magnitude improvements in clinical outcomes. Numerous prophylaxis trials demonstrate that regular ivermectin use leads to large reductions in transmission. Multiple, large “natural experiments” occurred in regions that initiated “ivermectin distribution” campaigns followed by tight, reproducible, temporally associated decreases in case counts and case fatality rates compared with nearby regions without such campaigns.

Conclusions:

Meta-analyses based on 18 randomized controlled treatment trials of ivermectin in COVID-19 have found large, statistically significant reductions in mortality, time to clinical recovery, and time to viral clearance. Furthermore, results from numerous controlled prophylaxis trials report significantly reduced risks of contracting COVID-19 with the regular use of ivermectin. Finally, the many examples of ivermectin distribution campaigns leading to rapid population-wide decreases in morbidity and mortality indicate that an oral agent effective in all phases of COVID-19 has been identified."

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8088823/ 

 

 

 

 https://covid19criticalcare.com/

"A group of world-renowned doctors and scientists brought truth to power in Washington, D.C. this weekend, at a Sunday march attended by tens of thousands and at a lively round table discussion on Monday.  Read the Article"

"For more information about the FLCCC Alliance and our Prevention & Treatment Protocols for COVID-19, please visit www.flccc.net"
 
"Safety of Ivermectin

Standard doses of ivermectin (0.2 mg/kg x 12 days) have a nearly unparalleled safety profile historically among medicines as evidenced by the following findings:
WHO Guidelines for Scabies: “the majority of side effects are minor and transient”

Prof Jacques Descotes, Toxicologist, Expert on Safety of Ivermectin: “severe adverse events are unequivocally and exceedingly rare”

LiverTox Database: Not considered toxic to the liver

Nephrotox Database- Not considered toxic to the kidney

PneumoTox: Not considered toxic to the lungs


Safety of High Dose Ivermectin

In COVID-19, particularly in regard to the emerging variants of concern, viral loads are higher and viral replication is thought to be prolonged. Given that ivermectin has
demonstrated a strong dose-response relationship in terms of viral clearance, higher doses have not only been required, but have demonstrated clinical efficacy. Below are hyperlinked references to numerous studies demonstrating the wide safety profile of high dose ivermectin in COVID and other diseases."

"COVID-19 Studies
1) Randomized controlled trial
of ivermectin in COVID using 0.6mg/kg x 5 days reported no differences in side effects.
2) Randomized controlled trial
, with 3 arms; one arm treated with 1.2 mg/kg for 5 days, and another treated with 0.6mg/kg for 5 days with no differences in side effects
3) A report by the State Health Minister
on 3,000 patients in La Pampa, Argentina who were part of a “test and treat” program were given 0.6 mg/kg daily for 5 days. Liver function tests and significant side effects were closely monitored and none were reported.
4) A report by the Health Minister in Misiones
, Argentina, also using 0.6 mg/kg for 5 days with no significant adverse events reported.

Malaria Studies
1) Safety trial of patients with malaria
given 0.3, 0.6, and 1.2 mg/kg daily of ivermectin for 7 days was well tolerated with no adverse events
2) Study of “Efficacy and Safety of High dose ivermectin
for Reducing Malaria Transmission” compared 0, 0.3 and 0.6 mg/kg for 3 days and found no differences in side effects."

Healthy Volunteers
1)
Report of a group of healthy adult subjects given up to 10 x standard dose, either 2-4x the standard dose three times a week or 610x standard dose once and found the doses generally well tolerated.
Systematic Reviews

1) A systematic review and meta-analysis
of high dose ivermectin found no difference in side effects between dose of up to 0.4 mg/kg and higher doses (up to 0.8 mg/kg doses every 3 months.
2) A comprehensive review of 350 articles
by the famous French toxicologist Jacques Descotes was presented in early 2021. In this document, he states,
a. “Based on all the data presented above, the author of this report believes it is fair to say that ivermectin did not directly induce an excess of deaths in treated groups of human subjects. Statements, past or present, that ivermectin can kill patients, are therefore considered to be misleading as they do not take into account all the medical information that has been accumulated over the last decades.“

b. “Only very few cases of accidental human overdose have been reported despite
the wide availability of ivermectin as a veterinary and human medicine [Hall et al., 1985;Graeme et al., 2000; Deraemecker et al., 2014; Goossens et al., 2014].
Usually, moderate neurotoxic manifestations with rapid recovery after unspecific supportive measures were the predominating course of events. No accidental overdose including in infants and young children had a lethal outcome."  Emphasis added.

https://covid19criticalcare.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/FLCCC-Information-Evidence-for-Safety-of-Ivermectin.pdf 

 

There you have it.  It is for you to decide whom you want to believe.

 

Your comments, if any, will always be very much appreciated.

 

 

 

 

Sunday, February 6, 2022

THE TRUTH WILL ALWAYS BUBBLE TO THE SURFACE AS IT HAS THROUGHOUT HISTORY

No matter what the Governments of the world try to do, to bury the truth, sooner or later the forces embodied in the truth will ultimately overcome any conspiracy against the people, by the ruling class, and blow up their lies and deceptions, employed by them.

The latest example comes from the finding by the John Hopkins Institution.

"Johns Hopkins study reignites COVID lockdown debate"

"'They have contributed to reducing economic activity, raising unemployment, reducing schooling, causing political unrest, contributing to domestic violence and undermining liberal democracy,' the report noted."

"A recent controversial Johns Hopkins meta-analysis reignites a discussion about the adverse consequences of lockdowns after finding they had no significant mortality benefit during the first wave of the 2020 pandemic in the United States and Europe, according to a recent report

"We find no evidence that lockdowns, school closures, border closures and limiting gatherings have had a noticeable effect on COVID-19 mortality," said the authors of the study, which is not peer-reviewed and reflects the authors' views, not necessarily those of the university.  

The study authors, however, did find closing nonessential businesses reduced COVID-19 mortality by 10.6%, which is likely most related to the closure of bars.

"'SHOULD BE REJECTED OUT OF HAND': LOCKDOWNS ONLY REDUCED COVID DEATH RATE BY .2%, STUDY FINDS'"

"Our study shows the benefits [of lockdowns] — in terms of fewer deaths — are questionable and small," Jonas Herby, special advisor at the Center for Political Studies in Copenhagen, Denmark, told Fox News. Herby's research focuses on law and economics, and he is a co-author of the study. 

The meta-analysis – a survey or study of previous studies – which Herby wrote along with two other  prominent economists, noted lockdowns have had "devastating effects" as society weathers the unintended consequences.

https://www.foxnews.com/health/covid-lockdowns-johns-hopkins-study-debate# 

I disagree with their belief that the consequences were unintended because a total idiot would know that shutting down any business will have major consequences for those affected.  We all should know, by now, that the tactics employed were all aimed at creating a panic like demand for their experimental vaccines in their pipelines.  History will judge, in time, all these bad actors, like Big Pharma, WHO, CDC, Medical Industrial Complex, including Hospitals and those Doctors who cowardly did nothing to prevent unnecessary deaths, by refusing to prescribe lifesaving existing, FDA approved drugs off-label, at the onset of the decease.  Waiting for the patient to become gravely ill, is not good medical practice, as I stated many times before, is medical malpractice, at best.

Why would we as a society pay for criminal experiments that take animal viruses, which did not affect humans, and allow some mad scientists to engineer them to kill humans by the millions?  Why are those responsible not executed, for the mass murders they are responsible for?  Why are those who ordered not to allow lifesaving drugs to be administered, not in jail?  Are they better than the mad scientists?

 

Another example is provided by the CDC, who after more than two years finally admit that natural immunity obtained by experiencing the illness was six times stronger, during the Delta wave, than vaccination.

"CDC: Natural immunity stronger than vaccines alone during delta wave"

"DENVER (KDVR) — Natural immunity was six times stronger during the delta wave than vaccination, according to a new report from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The report, published Jan. 19, analyzed COVID outcome data from New York and California, which make up about one in six of the nation’s total COVID deaths.

The study has limits — namely, it was done before the omicron wave and doesn’t factor in any information about boosters. It does, however, broadly agree with studies from other countries."
 
https://kdvr.com/news/coronavirus/covid-19-vaccine/cdc-report-natural-immunity-stronger-than-vaccines-alone-during-delta-wave/ 
 
So, why would recovered people be forced to take the Jab or else, or periodically required to test? It is obvious, they who financially benefit from these vaccines, need your business, like it or not.