Showing posts with label Remdesivir. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Remdesivir. Show all posts

Monday, August 14, 2023

Society was conditioned to believe that they needed a doctor to be healthy, rather than health being viewed as something each individual was empowered to seek for themselves.

Hundreds (or possibly thousands) of highly effective medical treatments for common diseases have been kept off the market to preserve the market for expensive but ineffective treatments that often require lifelong purchasing. For example, prior to the legislative battle to legalize acupuncture, I remember cases where Chinese immigrants were raided at gunpoint for practicing acupuncture in their own community without a license. 

Please read "How Corruption Dictates the Practice of Medicine," A Midwestern Doctor, April 16, 2022.

Society was conditioned to believe that they needed a doctor to be healthy, rather than health being viewed as something each individual was empowered to seek for themselves. This effectively created an unlimited demand for medical services, and as the above graphs show, an ever-growing need for medical spending.  Medical Nemesis by Ivan Illich was the earliest work I was able to locate detailing this change and its consequences.

Things that genuinely improve public health (and thereby reduce medical expenses) are typically not allowed to emerge, while pointless initiatives that do not improve public health (water fluoridation or annual flu shots) are continually promoted. Likewise, basic health education is not taught to most people, and instead, health behaviors developed by corporate interests constitute the majority of “health education” (industry-funded nutrition textbooks for example are very common in college courses). In short, there are dozens of simple and obvious policy changes that many have independently identified which could rapidly improve public health and save a lot of money, but despite decades of campaigning to enact them, most have never been adopted.

Hundreds (or possibly thousands) of highly effective medical treatments for common diseases have been kept off the market to preserve the market for expensive but ineffective treatments that often require lifelong purchasing. For example, prior to the legislative battle to legalize acupuncture, I remember cases where Chinese immigrants were raided at gunpoint for practicing acupuncture in their own community without a license. 
For those interested, I’ve spent decades tracking those “forgotten cures” down, and while I have found many that for one reason or another were oversold and didn’t really work, I also found many others that were highly effective.

Every medical service or product is designed to encourage the consumption of more medical services or products.

A rigid hierarchy was created to support this monopoly.

Friday, March 24, 2023

"We knew we were going to kill people. That's premeditated murder. We knew we were going to do it, and we went along with it anyway"

Saturday, February 11, 2023

DR. BRYAN ARDIS ON REMDESIVIR: "That's because the virus wasn't doing it."

Wednesday, November 2, 2022

Remdesivir increases the risk of death by 3%, the chances of renal failure by 20%, and costs $3,000/course. Ivermectin reduces the risk of death by 50% and costs the W.H.O. two cents

It should be clear by now that when you put your trust in doctors using hospital care, those doctors are not using their best tested, studied options or practice.  No.  Unfortunately, they're merely following the orders from on high, even from international bodies, far removed from local knowledge, local, standard, and tested care.  So when you think you are under the care of an expert, ah, your doctor is only an expert at following the orders of outside agencies.   

If you look at the 4 independent studies, including the large studies by the W.H.O. it shows the opposite effect.  Remdesivir increases the risk of death.  Let me say that again.  Remdesivir increase the risk of death by 3%.  It increases your chances of renal failure by 20%.  This is a toxic drug.  But just to make the situation even more preposterous, the federal government will give hospitals a 20% bonus on the entire hospital bill if they prescribe Remdesivir to Medicare patients.  [Oh, so the federal government is trying to kill elderly patients.  Huh.]  The federal government is incentivizing hospitals to prescribe a medication which is toxic.  So it should be noted that Remdesivir costs about $3,000 a course.  Dr. Kory spoke about Ivermectin.  Ivermectin reduces the risk of death by about 50%.  It costs the W.H.O. $0.02.  Two cents.  So as regards Dexamethazone,  This is the wrong drug in the wrong dose for the wrong duration of time yet every clinician in this country will absurdly use this homeopathic dose of Dexamethazone.  Why?  Because the NIH tells them to do this.  So what the NIH and other agencies have ignored are multiple FDA-approved drugs.  These are FDA-approved drugs.  These are not experimental drugs, which are cost-effective, and safe, and have unequivocally, unequivocally been shown to reduce the death of patients in the ICU and in hospital . . . .

Saturday, October 29, 2022

Remdesivir increases the risk of kidney failure at least 20-fold based on the World Health Organization data

Wednesday, February 16, 2022

DR. ARDIS: HOSPITALIZED PATIENTS WERE DYING FROM REMDESIVIR BUT HOSPITALS WERE TAGGING THE DEATHS AS COVID DEATHS TO SCARE U.S. POPULATION


Dr. Ardis is one of the American doctors

Bioweapon is designed to target heart and muscle tissue.  The only authorizied drug to 

19:54  The mRNA vaccines dramatically increase 1) heart inflammation leading to myocarditis, 2) increasing blood clot disorders, 3) increasing heart disease, 4) increasing strokes and other cardiovascular events immediately following the vaccines.  And they published the resulting damage to the heart after the Pfizer shot, we are observing as the American Heart Association, that they're seeing that these are long-lasting side effects and they're staying for at least two and a half months after the second shot.  So this is their warning.  So the spike proteins, just so you know, judge, jury . . . have been designed to target and stop hearts of people around the world.  Remdesivir is known to cause heart failure, kidney failure, liver failure, which causes death and increases death and likelihoods of mortality with the drug Remdesivir.  

20:47  "The vaccines are," published by the American Heart Association  "to directly cause heart attacks, strokes, and blood clots.  That's what it does.  The entire plandemic, the entire plandemic and the medical protocols and then restricting certain drugs like chloroquine that Anthony Fauci said was proven to be cardiotoxic, leading to death of COVID-19 patients in May of 2020, I just showed you The Cardiovascular Toxicology Journal says that Remdesivir is FAR MORE heart toxic than Chloroquine.  Yet two months later, the FDA ignores that.  The NIH ignores that.  Then in December they go ahead and publish their updates.  And the update is "Only Remdesivir is FDA approved."  Still.  There is an outright attempt to murder people and kill people, and they are going after the elderly first.  Now they're targeting the young, and I'm going to show you, and this is when I showed them, and this is when Dr. Reiner Fuellmich, and if you just watch his face, he couldn't believe it.  And I know the world needed to know it, so I needed to take the world's audience through this.  

21:50  With all the information I've given to you about Remdesivir and its toxic effects on the human body, the FDA in America on January 21, 2022, just three weeks ago, now has authorized, and I pulled up the document and I read the title, "The FDA Is Now Extending the Emergency Use Authorization" and they're saying that Remdesivir is the only authorized to treat all COVID-19 pediatric-age people.  And it says, right here in the title, "It starts with newborns 7 pounds heavy."  So any baby, 3.5 kilograms, and anyone older than that . . . .  I said, so now they're taking babies, who are born to women in hospitals, are taking them to the nursery and they tell you to PCR test them.  If it comes back positive, insert intravenously and pump that baby three days full of Remdesivir.  And then it says, in the actual EUA, there is no alternative approved treatment for pediatric patients except for Remdesivir.  And I said, "I have to make the world know what it says in here because it is only an emergency use authorization, not an approval by the FDA.  And it says that.  So I took them through, and your audience should know this too.  

  

Monday, January 17, 2022

NURSE: 4 DOSES OF REMDESIVIR KILLED MY BEST FRIEND'S HUSBAND

Hospitals give hospitalized COVID patients Remdesivir.  Why?  Because it's safe and effective?  No.  It's not safe at all.  It killed 53% of patients in an ebola trial.  People have better odds with Russian Roulette.  It's given to hospitalized COVID patients by order of the CDC.  Think of the CDC as bookies for the pharmaceutical industry.  FDA rubberstamps approval on Big Pharma products, who then need to get their product to market.  That's where the CDC comes in.  They cook deals with hospitals around the country so that hospitals are incentivized monetarily to force-feed patients Remdesivir.  Their pimps, uh, brokers cut deals with hospital consortiums across the United States.  To cast the patina of legitimacy on the process, the CDC may hand the payment process on Remdesivir over to Medicare and Medicaid.  Remdesivir kills your kidneys.  

If a loved one must go into the hospital, make sure you or someone in your family or your loved one ask what is in the IV drip.  

Even this article by NBC News cites the WHO's position on Remdesivir, saying that it has no effect on mortality, meaning if you're close to dying Remdesivir is not going to bring you back.  No kidding.  Not only will it not bring you back, it will push over the cliff of death BECAUSE IT KILLS YOUR KIDNEYS.  Be sure to listen to Bryan Ardis in the first post you find in the links above.  That article makes zero reference to the ebola trial where Remdesivir killed 53% of patients in the trial.   

Tuesday, October 26, 2021

REPORTING FROM CMS: Number one cause for underreporting was that the medical professionals didn't know anything about the [reporting] system.

So you're going to have babies; they're going to come out looking normal, and when they turn 18, 19, 20-years-old, they're not going to have any eggs to actually get pregnant with because these chemicals in these shots are known to be toxic to the developing eggs inside the ovaries of the developing females, . . .

The title of this video is Depopulation by Any Means: Dr. Bryan Ardis, Dr. Reiner Fuellmich, and Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg.

At the 23:17 mark, Dr. Aris refers everybody to Thomas Renz's siteAmerica's Front Line Doctors.  MyFreeDoctor.com.  

32:00  Lawsuit filed on July 19 against the federal government was an injunction to stop the EUA of the vaccines.  Because one of the reporting services for CMS, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, there was a whistleblower who came forward and her statistical review of the data--just in CMS--shows from just 3 days after the shot is 45,000 deaths in that database alone.  And they have not extended the search out yet to 4 days post-vaccine, 5 days post-vaccine but they're going to do it.  That's what this actual lawsuit is about.  

The important thing is that in the FDA document published on October 22, 2020, they actually stated that they were going to be doing a rapid assessment of reporting coming in from injuries from the vaccines.  And they were going to be using this and they stated in that FDA document, "We're going to be trusting the CMS data to give us the best information that we can relay to the American public on these vaccines being safe and effective."  Do you know what system that was?   The CMS system and no one ever talked about that 45,000 deaths that were reported in the first 3 days of the shot reported into Medicare, which is typically the older generation in America, and Medicaid which are the impoverished individuals in America in just that 1 out of 11 reporting systems.  VAERS reported over 12,000 which is the reporting system into the Health and Human Services.  This whistleblower said that all of the numbers being reported are off by a factor of five.  She's a mathematician, 25 years of doing algorithm and health databases.  She said that the total count is off by a factor of FIVE.

34:00  Dr. Zelenko, Dr. Mercola, they're all convinced that the counting is off by TEN or even a HUNDRED times.  About these reporting systems, the University of Harvard in 2010 did a review of all reporting systems on vaccine injuries into the United States' agencies.  After a 3-year review, they found that it is less than 1%.  I hear that doctors and other people in the media that the counting is upwards of only 10% or less.  No, it's not.  The actual number in the document from Harvard Pilgrim--it's less than 1% of all reported.  So it doesn't matter what number you hear reported on deaths, it doesn't matter how many miscarriages or demyelinating diseases, or auto-immune diseases or Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS), or how many hundreds now of Bell's Palsy that's been reported, you can add 2 ZEROS for every one of those figures to get close to what Harvard said is the actual data. 

35:35  VIVIANE FISCHER  Because some people [meaning medical care workers, people who do the reporting] think that they are with the vaccination program performing a vital and valuable service on behalf of society, that they might not report the adverse effects of the vaccines for fear of its disasters could bring the vaccine campaign to a halt.  We had problems too at a convalescent home in Berlin, where out of 13 people who were vaccinated 8 died.  That was never reported.  I mean who died shortly after vaccination.

ARDIS  In that document from Harvard, it actually states that the #1 cause for underreporting was that the medical professionals didn't know anything about the [reporting] system.  #2 was that if they wrote it down in their records, the doctor would have to go down to the VAERS data system and actually report it a second time and it got in the way of the workflow experience in the office for the doctors.  When Harvard approached the CDC at the end of the 3 years, they asked them to allow Harvard to help them develop a better system of reporting.  The CDC took the consultant away from the Harvard Review study and told them, "No more that we're going to assist Harvard and all in that initiative."  So there's been no change since then.  And I will say that you guys have had some frontline American doctors on there, Dr. Lee Merritt, who said that it was very obvious that a patient who had just received a vaccine, a teenager, immediately went into Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS).  And she looked at the doctor who was trying to get the teenager up onto the gurney and this doctor is the one who is treating this patient, she said, "When did she receive her vaccine?"  

DOCTOR:  It was just an hour earlier.  

38:00  And she said, "This is Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS).  This is the first listed side-effect on the FDA's guide in October.  And she looked at the doctor, who is a colleague of hers, and asked, "Are you going to report this to VAERS?"

And his response was, "What's VAERS?"

So, yes, there is a huge amount of underreporting, for sure.  I would suspect, for sure, based on this whistleblower coming out, that Thomas Renz has filed this lawsuit on behalf of America's Frontline Doctors, that when it's a factor of FIVE, you have to estimate that it's at least a [factor of] TEN.  For sure, the actual numbers are 45,000 just within 3 days of getting the shots.  

WOLFGANG WODARG:  I just spoke about the incentives for the doctors to tell something or not to tell it.  And that depends on what to charge for it and it depends on whether they feel they have made a mistake, then they would not like to say it.  If they gave a vaccination, they would not like so much to tell it to anybody if something happens.  So there are such problems, which distort all statistics, and we have to keep this in mind.  And I mam very sure that we have much more side effects with this so-called vaccination than we have in the numbers and the statistics in all administrations 

39:30  In Germany, it wouldn't be just the doctor who does the vaccination who would need to report this but if a doctor has a patient, just what we heard earlier from Ardis, so if someone comes to the doctor and says, "I just had a vaccination, and I have a rash or headache or something, the doctor at a vaccination clinic would also have to report in fact.  

40:35  On the FDA slide #16, in October 22, 2020, there is a side effect listed on there.  It is called Multi-System Inflammatory Syndrome in Children, MIS-C, a brand new disease that's only been created and given a diagnostic code since 2020.  We all know that COVID, or SARS-CoV-2, was a very little threat to children and to pregnant women.  We already knew that.  but there were very rare occurrences where the spike protein of the Coronavirus could create this Multi-System Inflammatory Syndrome in Children. It's a known side effect of the vaccine.  The FDA knew it.  by definition, if you look up the Mayo Clinic's definition of what Multi-System Inflammatory Syndrome in Children, it is a severe inflammation of multiple organs in the body, including the brain, the kidneys, the spleen, the gastrointestinal tract, the eyes, the skin.  This is all part of that.  If you look up complications on their definition of this actual syndrome, it can be deadly.  Now, in VAERS, I have not seen a single one of these reported into VAERS, but if you go to CDC.gov.com, there are already reports recorded since the shots have started.  There have already been 4,200 cases reported to the CDC of occurrences of Multi-System Inflammatory Syndrome in Children, and already over 40 deaths of children, reported to the CDC.  [Ardis does not touch on the fact that since June 2020, scores of cases of Multi-System Inflammatory Syndrome in adults, MIS-A, in adults have also been reported.  Oh, God.]  And this is what you want to push on all the masses of children in America and across the world to allow them to go to school?  I find this atrocious and disgusting.  And everyone needs to know that this is a known side-effect because the mRNA, and the spike protein in the shots or anything else that might be in those shots, are going to cause this debilitating, horrible reaction of inflammation in multiple organs at one time in the body of children.  There have been trials by, like Stanford.  Stanford has been setting up a study to allow vaccination of 6-month-olds, 2-year-olds, so you're seeing some of these being given to children, pushed out to children.  So these have actually already started to be corresponded (meaning that they're being recorded and evaluated?).

TRANSMISSION

44:00  Also, you're going to see what Wolfgang can talk about: transmission, shedding from the vaccinated parents to their children.  Oh, God.  You're seeing reports that all MIS-C started spiking.  You can actually look on CDCgov, the spike for MIS-C starts in December 2020, spikes in January, and continues to go up.  The chart below is a 7-day moving average.   

Children, toddlers, babies being vaccinated?  Oh, yeah, there are reports of 2-year-olds having menstruating blood clots after an hour of their parents being vaccinated?  This is already being reported in 2-year-old, 4-year-old, 6-year-old daughters.  In girls, this is the attempt in those female bodies to remove the toxic effects they're being exposed to by their vaccinated parents, or whom ever they're around.  

45:15  I call it transmission, you call it shedding, but when you put in 50 billion particles of mRNA, you're going to get 50 billion spike proteins.  You're going to get more than that in antibodies.  And the human body is going to start to shed these things.  You're going to transmit it through coughing, through sweating, through urine, through semen.  You have to excrete it out of your body, this is not healthy; it's an overabundance of immune reactions.  So the body is going to try to shed the spike proteins, it's going to try to shed the antibodies.  We already know how detrimental these antibodies are.  The antibodies themselves have already been proven with the Johnson & Johnson and AstraZeneca shot, those actual antibodies against double-stranded DNA, which is what is in those shots--the transgenes--we already know they cause Systemic lupus erythematosus, which I referenced earlier.  You're going to see auto-immune diseases come from the shots.  You're going to see the shedding of antibodies and spike proteins in other people.  It's just a horrible thing.  They knew this was going to happen.  It's in the FDA documents, and the FDA logo is on every slide.  These side-effects are permanent and lifelong?  

48:00  When we came out in October of 2020 with the FDA document myocarditis was listed as one of the known side effects.  Now, what are you hearing reported by all the teenagers that are now being given the shots?  You're hearing hundreds of thousands of reports of myocardidits.  And some of these athletes and teenagers are dying in high schools, high school ages.  But the FDA already knew this.  What's incredible to me is that the FDA said this week, "Because of the concerns about myocarditis in children before they start putting this into all children in America, we want Pfizer literally to expand how many children they put in the trial.  Why would you want to give any more children a shot that is causing myocarditis, whether it's in a trial of any kind or to the masses?  Why would you encourage any more children, or risk their life for health, over an experimental shot?  

49:40  Also, all pregnant women need to beware--there is polyethylene glycol 2000 in the Pfizer and Moderna shots; there's polysorbate 80 in the Johnson & Johnson and AstraZeneca shots; there's graphene oxide that's been determined to be inside of the Pfizer shot.  If you're pregnant with a female baby, there are two trimesters in which the female body's ovaries, inside your baby, will be creating all the eggs it will ever have for its whole life.  Infertility that's going to be coming from this is not in this generation--your babies are going to be born unable to have children of their own.  So you're going to have babies; they're going to come out looking normal, and when they turn 18, 19, 20-years-old, they're not going to have any eggs to actually get pregnant with because these chemicals in these shots are known to be toxic to the developing eggs inside the ovaries of the developing females.  So you're going to look back and say, "You know what--that shot didn't cause any harm to my child.  I got the vaccines when I was pregnant with you.  At 10-years-old, you're fine; at 20-years-old, you're fine; and then you go to get pregnant and try to have children, you never will be able to.  This is a great attempt to try to sterilize and infertilize the world, it appears.  Every pregnant woman should be warned that they should never take these shots.  Outside of the miscarriages that are being reported within days of the shots, think about the baby inside.   

51:38  Two things should be disturbing to people, I think, especially in America.  We've been raised to trust this one agency to do its due diligence, to approve things to be safe and effective medically.  That's called the FDA.  They do this FDA approval process.  Why in the world has any American been okay with the fact that they mandated, the NIH didn't, Anthony Fauci didn't, a never FDA-approved to be the only treatment for COVID?  It has been FDA-approved in October only after they already killed 500,000 Americans.  But it was never FDA approved when the pandemic started because the Ebola study proved that it was not safe and effective, and the FDA was not going to approve it.  Why then the next step--a vaccine that's never been tried on humans before.  And it's never been FDA-approved.  Why in the world did we drop all common sense and respect for what we thought was an agency that was doing some kind of review on medical devices and drugs to determine if they were safe and effective?  Why didn't we just throw that out the window and just trust you to just throw anything you want at us?  They've used every cultic tactic that they could think of through the media.  53:00

AMERICA: Has only 4.5% of the world's population, but 25% of all the world's COVID-19 deaths. How did that happen?

Thanks to Walter Riley @ Lew Rockwell.

Remdesivir

In May 2020, when Fauci and the NIH put out their mandates for treating hospitalized patients, I knew that based on the drug they assigned hospitals to use in their protocols to treat COVID patients, Remdesivir, would turn out to be Fauci's genocide. 

3:50  It was going to be how Antony Fauci was going to kill hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of Americans in hospitals treated around the country and I have not gotten off of this ever since.  

The truth is that in the memo when Fauci stated was that there was one drug and one drug only that "was found to be effective and a viral trial against Ebola virus a years earlier.  And this experimental, anti-viral drug, called Remdesivir, that at that time had never been FDA approved, he said it was proven safe and effective against the Ebola virus and that now we were going to use it in America as the only treatment for all hospitalized, COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2 infected people.  

And so I had never heard of Remdesivir, but I had selected the actual hyperlink on NIH.gov's website, the National Institutes of Health, and this is important for . . . you mentioned you have audiences all around the country--it really doesn't matter how big your audience is or how small it is or where it is.  It doesn't matter if there is only 1 person in that audience, they all have loved ones and family members--they all need to be warned of this same message, so I was going to take on and have been ever since, to take on any audience no matter how big their platform is to warn as many people as possible of the ill-advised protocols that were going to do more harm and cause more death than the SARS-CoV-2 infection by itself, and that still stands true a year and a half later.  

On the May 1st, 2020 memo, Fauci claimed that the Remdesivir, on the Ebola trial, proved it to be safe and effective against the Ebola virus, this drug called Remdesivir. So I clicked the link to read the study, which I've read studies for the last 20 years being in practice, only to find out that not only was the drug not found to be safe, it definitely was not found to be effective.  It was the least effective and had the highest death rate of the 4 experimental drugs that were in that trial.  

5:50  So halfway through this trial with the Ebola patients in Africa, the Safety Independent Board found that Remdesivir had a mortality rate of 53.1%.  In fact, it was the only drug that had a death rate of over half of everyone they gave it to.  So the drug was found to be so dangerous that the Independent Board in August 2019 pulled Remdesivir from the study and said "No other Africans could get this drug.  It wasn't safe or effective against the Ebola virus." It was only proven to be the most deadly.  Then I knew Antony Fauci was lying in his memo that he sent out to all hospitals that this was the only drug that you're going to use.  Don't use anything else, like Hydroxychloroquine in the memo.  He goes on to state in that memo that Hydroxychloroquine was proven in COVID-19 patients to cause heart attacks and deaths, so it's not approved for COVID-19.  And I just thought that was odd because Hydroxychloroquine has been approved for 70 years, safe and effective over the world, over-the-counter safe for most of the world.  So I knew something was wrong with that, but I didn't care about that as much as I wanted to know more about Remdesevir.  

7:00  So I learned very quickly in the New England Journal of Medicine from the Ebola virus trial that Anthony Fauci LIED.  Remdesivir was not safe and effective against the Ebola Virus, so then I wanted to know what else he was lying about, so I clicked the 2nd study that he was referencing and this was called a cohort study, totally funded and carried out by Gilead, which owns Remdesivir's patent.  And in March 2020, Gilead decided to treat 53 people from Japan, Canada, and America that were COVID-19 positive.  And they gave them the Remdesivir drug for 10 days.  And this is significant because the Ebola trial was published in December 2019.  Just 3 months later, in March 2020, Gilead is going to give Remdesivir to a new trial COVID group with 53 people.  In the Ebola trial, they gave Remdesivir for 28 days and the other drugs.  And at 28 days, Remdesivir was found to be the deadliest of the 4 experimental drugs.  So now 3 months after that Ebola trial is wrapped up and is finished, in March 2020, Gilead is like let's just give these COVID-19 patients, 53 of them, 10 days of Remdesivir, and see what happens.  And their actual conclusions were 23% of all 53 people they gave the drug to, Remdesivir for 10 days, 23% of them had acute kidney failure, liver failure, multiple organ failure, 8% had to be taken off the drug by Day 10 because they had such severe liver failure or kidney failure; they needed kidney transplants, they were doing to die.  That's 31% of everybody they put that drug on in that 53-person trial.  Now he lied about the efficacy of the Ebola trial.  Now I know this drug is super dangerous and causes acute kidney failure in 30% of everyone you give that drug to.  And then 2 months later, on May 1, 2020, Anthony Fauci is saying that this is the one proven drug, safe and effective for all Americans, and I knew he was lying, and I knew he was setting up a hospital protocol with a very dangerous drug, called Remdesivir, not proven safe or effective.  And that this one drug was going to be the cause of most deaths from supposedly COVID-19, that they would call COVID-19 deaths in hospitals, when in fact it was death by Remdesivir poisoning.  Remdesivir causes acute kidney failure in 30% of everybody you give it to within 5 days.  What happens then when you have someone on an IV bag, you continue to fill their body with water, their kidneys are diseased and shut down, they can't excrete water from the body in the form of urine.  So your bowels retain the water, then water goes and surrounds your heart, and then it floods into your lungs and you're drowning these people to death, and in every hospital in America, they're drowning your loved ones to death by shutting down their kidneys, flooding their lungs with water, and you're calling it Secondary COVID Pneumonia, and it is not.  And since May 2020, I've been telling every loved one of anyone in the hospital from here on out--you need to make sure the hospital does a sputum test to determine if it's really bacterial or viral pneumonia they're saying that your loved one has and if they're saying it's not hospital protocol, you know they're lying to you about the pneumonia.  That IS hospital protocol.  It's the only way you define if it's viral or bacterial pneumonia.  There's no other way: an X-Ray is not definitive for pneumonia.  But that's all they're doing, so they're getting away with lying to you, when in fact, they have pulmonary edema.  They flooded your loved one's lungs with water with a drug proven to shut down your kidneys.  

10:35  Just so you know, I have been in the media non-stop ever since. And I've been telling people to avoid hospitals at all costs.  Stay home. 

Let's use some common sense here.  How many people around the world, Sir, have been infected with COVID-19, and what is the death rate from that infection?   

I don't have the exact number.

ARDIS:  It's less than 1% of the entire world.  But the mortality rate, the death rate of Remdesivir in the Ebola trial when they gave that drug, 53% of all people died on that drug.  Why would you select a drug that had a higher mortality rate than the infection you decided to treat.  Let me tell you right now that Anthony Fauci in May 2020, asked our federal government to buy up all the reserves of Remdesivir from Gilead, and then asked our federal government not to share Remdesivir with another country until the end of 2020.  

Do you want to know why at the end of 2020 America had 550,000 dead Americans and no other country was even close to that death total?  Because we were the only country that had the majority of 95% of their COVID patients/victims they died in hospitals, in ICUs, and in those ICU's they were only treating them with Remdesivir.  No other country was doing.  They were poisoning all Americans with this drug, convincing all of Americans that it's a deadly COVID infection, and it never was.  It was a deadly poison drug in hospitals that they were using to kill you.  And then they needed that narrative that [COVID] was deadly because they needed to sell you on the coming vaccines as a savior.  And they needed the American population to buy into it.  At the end of 2020, we had 550,000 dead.  We only have 4.5% of the world's population.  95% of humans live outside the U.S.  But at the end of 2020, the entire world, 7 billion-plus people have had COVID-19 go in and out of them.  And American which has 4.5% of the world's population, had 25% of all dead COVID-19 people in the world.  How is that possible?  How did we have 25% of all COVID-19 deaths?  We only have 4% of the entire world's population.  I thought this thing was super deadly around the whole world.  The only thing that was different was that America was using Remdesivir to poison people in hospitals.  They never died from COVID-19.  They died from kidney failure, liver failure, secondary lung, pulmonary edema.  And when your lungs fill with water, they have to put you on a vent to force air into your lungs and they're just drowning your loved ones to death and that's what they've been doing.  13:27

Saturday, September 4, 2021

The Story Of Ivermectin And COVID-19

NCBI explains that 

Ivermectin proved to be even more of a ‘Wonder drug’ in human health, improving the nutrition, general health and wellbeing of billions of people worldwide ever since it was first used to treat Onchocerciasis in humans in 1988.

The narrator explains that Ivermectin, discovered in the 1970s, treats river blindness caused by a parasitic worm and caused untold suffering and even death in Central and Southern America and much of Africa. 

Instead of Ivermectin, Fauci endorsed Remdesivir, which has a lousy effect on mortality.  In fact, in the study that initially began to examine mortality, Fauci switched the results or endpoint of the study from Remdesivir’s impact on mortality to Remdesivir’s impact on “time it takes to recover.”

So why would Dr. Fauci and NIH continue to endorse a drug that costs $3,100 per course of treatment [unlike Ivermectin, which is narrowly free] and that has shown to have no impact on mortality?  Who makes Remdesivir and how are they related to who gets to decide which drugs can be used to treat COVID-19? 

Remdesivir is made by Gilead Sciences, a pharmaceutical company located in Foster City, CA.  From 1997-2001, the chairman of Gilead was Donald Rumsfeld, one of the architects of the War in Iraq.  

When Ford lost the 1976 election, Rumsfeld returned to private business and financial life, and was named president and CEO of the pharmaceutical corporation G. D. Searle & Company. He was later named CEO of General Instrument from 1990 to 1993 and chairman of Gilead Sciences from 1997 to 2001.

During the same period, one of the board members of Gilead was George Schultz, a long-time Bush Family ally who was instrumental in convincing George W. Bush to run for the United States.  

In order to understand why the NIH treatment panel is so pro-Remdesivir, it’s essential to understand the financial ties between Gilead Sciences and members of that treatment panel.  Looking at the treatment panel’s financial disclosures, you will see that no fewer than 7 members disclosed financial support from Gilead Sciences.  Interestingly, the 3 co-chairs who select the other members of the panel, do not disclose support from Gilead.  However, two of the Chairs, Roy Gulick and Henry Masur, both receive financial support from Gilead.  Even more interestingly, the third co-chair, Clifford Lane was actually was one of the authors of the NIAID study on Remdesivir, but you won’t see his name in the list of the article’s authors.  You have to look at the financial disclosure form that accompanied that article.  

It’s also worth noting that 7 out of 12 of these co-authors on that study disclosed funding from Gilead Sciences.  The significance of this cannot be overstated.  Two of the three chairs of the NIH COVID-19 Treatment Panel, the people who put the panel together, received financial support from Gilead Sciences, while the other was intimately involved in the study that attempted to and failed to prove that Remdesivir was an effective treatment of COVID-19.  

Given these professional and financial ties, is there any way that we could reasonably expect them to impartially judge the best treatments for COVID-19?  Or choose panel members who advocate for repurposing cheap, off-patent drugs that would completely undercut the market for one of the main products of a company with which they enjoy close financial and professional ties? 

Saturday, July 17, 2021

Study shows remdesivir as primary COVID treatment is a total bust

by Daniel Horowitz for The Blaze, reposted at the Ron Paul Institute

Sixteen months into this virus, our government has nothing to offer us in terms of treatment in the hospital but remdesivir at $3,100 a dose and zero treatment options at the critical early-stage, when serious complications can be pre-empted. Now, a new study from the University of Iowa shows what we knew all along – that remdesivir failed to reduce mortality one iota. Why are we to believe the same government entities about embracing the clot shots and shunning so many other cheaper and effective treatments after spending billions and losing countless lives on a failed drug?

After 
62 studies, 32 of them randomized controlled trials, establishing ivermectin as an effective treatment and an even more effective preventative to keep people out of the hospital in the first place, our government refuses to endorse its use and Big Tech continues to censor it. They claim they need more studies. Yet not a single randomized controlled trial showed remdesivir to be effective before they dove in headfirst and the NIH made it the only approved antiviral treatment for COVID. Now, a University of Iowa study published in JAMA Network Open on Thursday has shown that remdesivir was a complete bust.

Among the 2,334 US veterans studied in 124 hospitals, a higher share of remdesivir patients (12.2 percent) who took part in the study died than patients in the control group (10.6 percent). Moreover, on average, remdesivir patients spent six days in the hospital, while control group patients spent only three.

Previously, last October, the World Health Organization 
found that use of remdesivir in 11,000 patients across 400 hospitals in the world failed to lower the mortality rate or truncate time of stay in the hospital.

Take a look at 
this chart of treatment protocols for COVID hospital patients from the NIH, and you will see that aside from remdesivir, the only other treatment they offer is dexamethasone as the corticosteroid of choice to treat inflammation.

Again, dexamethasone was approved after just 
one randomized controlled trial last year, when ivermectin had over two dozen. This new study from the University of Iowa seems to show that dexamethasone is also a bust because outcomes did not improve among those who received that steroid along with remdesivir, as opposed to the control group that did not. In other words, after 16 months of research by doctors on numerous helpful antiviral and anti-inflammatory drugs, as well as more effective corticosteroids, the government has ensured that we have not advanced one iota in treating this virus. This is truly criminal and probably the gravest scandal of COVID.

Contrast this to ivermectin, which is available for $25. A Cochrane-standard (the highest level review) meta-analysis of ivermectin against COVID-19 by Bryant-Lawrie, which has been published in 
the American Journal of Therapeutics, concluded that ivermectin reduced fatality in hospitalized patients by 62%. But more important is getting people to use this immediately in an outpatient setting and, for vulnerable people, even preventively. The study found that "ivermectin prophylaxis reduced covid-19 infection by an average 86%."

Fair use excerpt. Read the whole article here.