The Global Disinformation Campaign Against Ivermectin - The "Fix" at the WHO Part 1

Although this is technically Part 3 of what I initially titled “the Fix of Dr. Andrew Hill,” in Parts 1 and Part 2 , I actually did not delve too much into what actually happened with Dr. Hill and his research on ivermectin. Instead I too often and too deeply digressed into treatises on the flaws and manipulations of evidence based medicine or went on trips down memory lane of the FLCCC’s origins and pre-ivermectin exploits. I ended Part 2 without even getting to the details of the historically catastrophic and corrupt actions committed by “Andy” and his colleagues to destroy and suppress the evidence of efficacy of ivermectin. So I am starting over, from the beginning of our interactions with Dr. Andrew Hill. The next two posts are long. Forgive me, but you simply cannot detail and document one of history’s most major crimes in a Tweet. Invest the time to educate yourself as to how it all happened. I think it is extremely important that more of society understand how the Science of Medicine has been corrupted and is being corrupted to this day. The time investment, in my mind, will be world-changing in perspective. But I will let you be the judge.

 I first met Dr. Andrew Hill (“Andy”) soon after Senator Ron Johnson invited me to his historic Senate Hearings on early COVID treatment for the Department of Homeland Security Committee (DHS) on December 8, 2020. Yes, the same DHS that, since Congress was taken over by Democrats, has accused physicians like me of being “domestic terrorists” because our anti-U.S health policy opinions might “incite violence.” Whatever.
 As a result of that testimony and the increasing attention to our comprehensive review paper on ivermectin that I had posted on a pre-print server a month before, I was invited to give the opening lecture a week later at an international conference put together by a French biotech company called MedinCell. They develop long-acting formulations of common medicines, allowing dosing to be as infrequently as every few months. Due to ivermectin’s protective efficacy against malaria, they were developing a long-acting formulation to be used in malaria prevention. They were also likely very interested in the potential application of ivermectin as a sort of “vaccine” against COVID (pretty cool huh?).
 Anyway, the conference had about 12 lecturers from all over the world, from Dr. Kylie Wagstaff of the globally groundbreaking SARS-CoV2 cell culture study of ivermectin from Monash University in Australia, to some of the principal investigators of the then ongoing or recently completed ivermectin RCT’s in COVID. Even Prof. Elgazzar was there – he of the supposedly (possibly) “fraudulent RCT” to a researcher sponsored by the organizations Unitaid and the WHO by the name of Dr. Andrew Hill.
 He lectured on the 3rd day of the conference, (which I missed but Paul Marik did not). Paul watched every lecture of the three-day conference while I was busy battling to get our massive paper ready to submit for publication with a reference manager that was behaving so badly that I was literally having to manually reorder and re-number over a hundred references. All during this historic reference manager battle, new ivermectin studies and trials were getting posted on pre-print servers every day making me spend most of my days renumbering references. A Groundhog Day of epic proportions. Forgive me for I digress. Again.
 Anyway, Paul calls and asks, “Hey did you know that a guy from the WHO presented his systematic review of all the randomized trials on ivermectin in COVID?”
 I was shocked. I thought our group was way ahead of everyone in our compilation of data (it turns out we were, more on that below).
 I immediately wrote to the MedInCell CEO and asked for Dr. Hill’s slides and contact info. After receiving the slide deck, I was immediately blown away as it contained markedly positive RCT results, some of which I was not yet aware of. And he had done an actual data synthesis of the 11 RCT’s which was mind-blowingly positive in terms of reduced time to viral clearance, time to clinical recovery, need for hospitalization, and death. At the time, those trials included over a 1,000 total patients (note Paxlovid and Remdesivir got Emergency Use Authorizations based on less patients from just a single trial, using Pharma’s well-established “one and done” fast track approval process built for Pharma at the PFDA (the P is not a typo).
 Andy responded immediately, we had an incredibly positive conversation, as any two researchers would when they think they may have stumbled upon data that potentially has global, historic implications. We started sharing our “origin stories” of how we had “discovered” the phenomenal data on the efficacy of ivermectin in COVID.
 “Andy’s” origin story of when he started to focus his research on ivermectin in COVID was that he had been hired in June 2020 by Unitaid, an international health care organization funded largely by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) and several other countries BMGF is also the 2nd largest funder of the WHO after the United States. Unitaid was collaborating on the ACT Accelerator program with the WHO (note that this program was completely run and staffed by BMGF ). Andy was in charge of a research team tasked with analyzing trials of repurposed drugs for use in COVID. At the time, I thought this was phenomenal as it was exactly what I shouted about in my Senate testimony, i.e. that our governmental health agencies were not initiating a coordinated effort to identify effective, readily available drugs to “repurpose” them to fight COVID. And here he was, the head of a team doing just that at the global level!
 Given this background, I asked him, “How and when did you come to choose to study ivermectin?” His answer, even then, was a little suspicious, “Well, we had been researching numerous repurposed medicines since June 2020, like favipiravir, hydroxychloroquine (I forget the others) and none of them showed efficacy” ( yeah right ). He then said, “I was told by a Professor at my University to look into ivermectin in early November.” Note my review paper was uploaded on a pre-print server on November 13th, 2020. Hmm. Do you think Big Pharma scientists were monitoring pre-print servers for emerging evidence on repurposed medicines?
 What you have to do here is remember the Professor that Andy mentioned. The, at that point, unknown Professor’s identity will be revealed later in this history, as I now know he was Big Pharma/BMGF’s “point man” that distorted and suppressed the evidence of efficacy of ivermectin at the WHO. He was the one in charge of compiling the evidence on ivermectin to the WHO Treatment Guideline committee. Note the WHO’s guidance is the most important in the world, influencing nearly every country on Earth (except the U.S given Remdesivir is the standard of care here despite the fact the WHO says it doesn’t work).
 In another bit of foreshadowing, by the end of this post, I believe I will convince you, as I have since become convinced, that Andy’s real mission was to find evidence of efficacy of repurposed drugs so that BMGF and Big Pharma could initiate their Disinformation campaign immediately upon identification of any effective generic drug which would threaten, well, everything really.
 Andy was doing opposition research , but we, nor he, did not know it (yet). During the early period of our collaboration, it was clear to me that he thought his job was to identify a repurposed drug for the WHO to actually recommend for use in the pandemic . When he finally found one (ivermectin), his paymasters quickly kicked off their historic and criminal Disinformation campaign, first by getting Andy to no longer speak publicly about his findings. Andy told me that right after his last public lecture to a South African group on January 29th, 2021, his Unitaid sponsors told him he could not longer give public statements or interviews. Apparently Andy’s last lecture was a bit too supportive and enthusiastic of ivermectin as he literally told the South Africans to “get ready, get supplies, etc.” In later months, Andy would show up on Twitter and/or post preprints attacking the evidence base of ivermectin as fraudulent. He even retracted his later published review paper, which, just like the FLCCC’s, found a massive reduction in mortality. His revised paper removed almost all of the evidence base and concluded that ivermectin had no impact on mortality. They eventually got him, hard. I am done with the foreshadowing here.
 This mission of identifying effective generic drugs was critical to, well, all the profits that Pharma has amassed in COVID. Public awareness of any effective repurposed drug would have destroyed the global vaccine campaign as well as blown up the markets for all the pricey new patented COVID drugs that were currently in the pipeline of numerous pharmaceutical corporations. We in the FLCCC had no idea at the time that we were starting to mess with the Big Boys. Like, pretty much the most powerful corporations on Earth. Not so fun fact: Marcia Angell, a long time Editor-in Chief of the New England Journal Of Medicine (essentially the top medical journal in the world) wrote in her book detailing the influence of Big Pharma in modern medicine that, in 2001, the ten largest pharmaceutical companies in the Fortune 500 reaped more profits than the rest of the Fortune 500 combined. I repeat, the ten biggest Pharma corporations in the Fortune 500 were more profitable than the rest of the Fortune 500 COMBINED. And the FLCCC was poking that bear at a time when a hundred billion dollar marketplace for their wares was opening up. Gives me chills today thinking back on it.  There are definitely moments when I wonder how I and we am still alive. Seriously.
 Anyway, here we were, discovering that a researcher from the WHO/Unitaid had found a strong signal of benefit amongst just the randomized controlled trials (the signal was blaring actually). Note that the FLCCC review paper I authored included all ivermectin data, not only the RCT’s, but also many OCT’s and the results of Health Ministry programs.
 Soon after my testimony, a former Texas Health Commissioner named Reyn Archer reached out to me. Reyn was working as Chief of Staff for Nebraska Congressman Jeff Fortenberry who was on the committee that oversaw the budgets for the health agencies. Anyway, they convinced the NIH Treatment Guidelines committee to give me and Paul an audience to present our findings. The meeting was scheduled for January 6th, 2021. We decided to invite Andy Hill to present his more expansive RCT data along with us, plus he would bring more “credibility” because he was working for an international health care agency. Little did I know that meeting was going to be our first battle between the FLCCC and Fauci in what is now an ongoing 20 month war. Actually it is not really an active war anymore because it has unfortunately reached a stalemate. All the countries and all the doctors who have used ivermectin successfully will continue to do so no matter how many high-impact journal trials and editorials claim it doesn’t work. However, new adopters are likely near nil after the publication of history’s most fraudulent trial in the New England Journal of Medicine put the final “nail in the coffin” (literally and metaphorically) of ivermectin.
 So on January 6, 2021, Paul Marik, Andy, and myself teamed up to give a 20+ minute presentation to the NIH guidelines committee. Andy essentially gave the same presentation he gave at Medincell’s conference 3 weeks earlier. This was the lecture he gav e. I presented the epidemiological analysis paper by Juan Chamie, Jennifer Hibberd, and David Scheim which showed massive reductions in both cases and deaths in the wake of Peru’s magnificent ivermectin distribution program called Operation Tayta. Paul presented newly released and as-yet-unpublished experimental data from Caly and Wagstaff of Monash University which found that indeed, standard doses of ivermectin do reach effective anti-viral concentrations in the blood.
 The academics and health bureaucrats on the committee were full of questions, skepticism, and dismissiveness, especially in regards to the results of the Peru program that I had presented. I suppose this was to be expected, plus it is kind of their job. But not one showed enthusiasm or optimism, that is for sure. The most telling part of the meeting was wild. It occurred at the very end, after the Committee discussion and questions, when first, Alice Pau, a Pharmacist in charge of co-ordinating the meeting, asked “Do you have any questions for us?” Paul Marik made a bold plea for the NIH to make a recommendation for ivermectin which I then emphasized. I hesitated asking my “real question” because our game plan going in was to not be confrontational, to be deferential and collegial, but I couldn’t help myself, so I called out one of the many parading elephants in the room.
 I asked, “Of all the medicines currently being used and/or studied for the treatment of COVID, all have had either weak recommendations for use or neutral ones in the form of “there is insufficient evidence to recommend or not recommend” Drug X. Yet since August of 2020, ivermectin is the only medicine which had a negative recommendation to not use outside clinical trials . Can I ask why that is?”
 Second after second ticked by, interrupted by Alice Pau trying to answer a question I really did not ask so I cut her off and asked my question again. Another long pause ensued. There were over 20 “experts” on the zoom call, and not one answered. The silence got long enough and uncomfortable enough that I started saying, “OK, I guess no-one knows why,” (I was pissed and, despite our plans of being collegial, decided to just be somewhat rude and dismissive of them). As soon as I said that, Chairman Cliff Lane talked over me and said to the group “Come on guys, we have to answer the question.”
 He then proceeded to give a similar and as condescending an answer to the question that Alice Pau tried to answer. It was a question I did not ask nor did I need an explanation for. He started to explain to me that the “strength” of the recommendation was “expert opinion only” and what that meant etc. I knew it was expert opinion only and knew what it meant, but that is not what I asked. I had asked why the recommendation was against use outside of clinical trials while it was one of history’s safest medications. I know all about the different grades of strength of recommendations. But he explained it to me anyway. I was actually offended, what did he think I was, a medical student?
 That ensuing silence in the face of a somewhat difficult question is what me and Del Bigtree now call the “NIH pause.” In an interview with Del, when I told him about what happened at this meeting, he laughed and said “that happened to us too!” Apparently, he and Bobby Kennedy Jr. once had a meeting with an NIH Vaccine Committee and asked them if any of the commitee members knew of any vaccine that had a randomized controlled trial to support it’s use, They too were met with silence for an uncomfortably long time.
 Now, I have a video recording of that meeting, and I will share that part. I think my FLCCC colleagues (and our lawyers) are going to freak that I did this without telling them. But, I just don’t care anymore about rules and laws when they are so brazenly being flouted and ignored in our destruction. Plus I don’t think this is breaking any law as government officials, when in the line of duty, should not have an expectation of privacy. So, here it is below, have a look and a listen, I only included the question section which is 5 minutes long. Especially listen to Paul’s “plea” on behalf of the American people for the NIH top provide guidance to the nation’s doctors so that they will be supported in prescribing patients ivermectin.

 I will say that, whatever we presented and pled for did have an effect. Several weeks later, out of the blue, the NIH recommendation was changed. They no longer recommended “against use outside a clinical trial,” and instead they changed it to a “neutral” recommendation, you know, the one where they write “there is insufficient evidence to recommend or not recommend” ivermectin.
 Win? Actually I thought not. Again, what these guys pull is so brazen to anyone knowledgeable, but no one's paying attention and very few are knowledgeable. But what you need to know is that there are many different strengths of recommendations, they can give a weak, moderate, or strong recommendation for a drug in the treatment of a disease. You can make a weak or moderate recommendation solely on observational trials data! Plus, the unparalleled safety profile of ivermectin combined with the existing highly positive data in over 1,000 patients and 12 randomized controlled trials should have led to at a minimum a weak recommendation in the midst of a humanitarian catastrophe (the winter of 2020-2021 was particularly brutal in U.S hospitals).
 However, had they done that, the entire country’s (and world’s) doctors would have started treating all COVID patients with ivermectin. They knew they could not do provide any recommendation stronger than “neutral.” Plus Fauci would never let that happen (remember, as a public servant, it is well documented that he has worked in the service of the pharmaceutical industry his entire career). So that's what they did.
 There was a lot of attention on Ivermectin after my testimony so they had to do something. Knowing what I know now of the immense powers of Big Pharma, I suspect that even if they had delivered a “weak” recommendation for use, it may not have moved the needle much. I say this largely because the market competitors of ivermectin had many other tactics they could use (and did) to prevent widespread adoption (i.e. their devastatingly effective “horse dewormer” public relations campaign deployed using synchronized messaging amongst all major TV, radio, and print outlets. Plus they probably knew that the WHO was going to update their recommendations based on Andy and his team's continued research over the next two months, so they punted. I would argue that they knew the fix was in at the WHO already. But this is when things get even crazier.
 Although we knew the NIH was not going to recommend (actually we really didn’t at the time as our collective naiveté and optimism was still profound), we became excited at another development. We were made aware of another deeply expert, well known researcher and physician named Tess Lawrie from the United Kingdom (and a South African like Paul Marik). Apparently, she saw my testimony video and was highly intrigued by my presentation of the evidence supporting ivermectin. She asked herself, “What is this doctor talking about?
 Tess has for decades been an expert reviewer of medical evidence. Her expertise is in conducting what are called “systematic reviews” and “meta-analyses” of the medical evidence for various therapeutics, just like Andrew Hill was doing for WHO/Unitaid. A systematic review and meta-analysis is considered the strongest form of medical evidence. She has published such reviews in the top medical journals, including many for the Cochrane Library, once considered the gold standard of such analyses (but no longer as they are now bought and paid for by Pharma/BMGF). Further, she has contributed in the development of treatment guidelines for the WHO, UK’s NHS, and other national and international health agencies.
 After watching my testimony, she immediately began to dig deep into the published and posted trials data on ivermectin in COVID. Note that experts generally rely on what is called “pattern recognition” and in her review of the evidence she recognized a remarkable pattern of results from the trials - consistent, often large magnitude benefits in time to clinical recovery, hospitalizations and death from varied countries and centers around the world.
 So, not only the 5 of us highly published clinicians and researchers in the FLCCC, but now there was a 2nd independent, deeply expert researcher who was also impressed with the same data signal. Tess was so impressed with the strength of the data, she immediately sprang into action and recorded a video on January 7 pleading with Boris Johnson and the UK gov’t and health authorities to look at and try to disseminate ivermectin to help her country. I don’t have the video but this was the screen shot of what turned out to be an incredibly compelling, impassioned plea to Boris Johnson and the UK Health Authorities to recommend ivermectin to treat COVID.

 Her emotions were exactly matched with how I felt when I was uploading my paper to a preprint server two months prior on Nov 13, 2020. Problem: Tess’s video plea was quickly taken down by YouTube, one of the first distressing actions taken to suppress the evidence of efficacy of ivermectin. It was the first shot in what is now a 20 month-long war.
 Soon after we saw Tess’s video, Paul and I found her contact info and quickly scheduled a zoom meeting with her. We were so impressed with her decades of experience, thoughtfulness, and dedication - she knew we had identified an effective drug and that people were dying all over the world and that this information had to get to health authorities and treatment guideline developers. I told her about Andy and his work so she reached out to him because she knew he had the most updated data from the randomized control trials that were being conducted. She invited him to work on a systematic review and meta-analysis for the Cochrane Library, a journal that had published many of her expert reviews in the past. She knew that time was of the essence because there were masses of people dying during the COVID surge in the winter of 2020. She knew that a review supporting ivermectin published in the Cochrane Library would immediately be noticed by doctors around the world.
 He apparently agreed to collaborate on the review. Andy would be extremely important to such an effort because the scope of his work for Unitaid was to search the clinical trial registries from all over the world to find any registered RCT on ivermectin in COVID. He had already found 59 registered RCT’s and had compiled a list of contacts of all the Principal Investigators for those trials and began having bi-weekly meetings with them. He was getting trial results way before any manuscript was being posted or published. And Andy was sharing the data with me and Paul. It was incredible hearting about positive results before anyone else in the world.
 But suddenly everything went south, and fast. On January 16, 2021, Andy suddenly posted his review of the RCT’s on a preprint server. Back then preprint servers were incredibly important in COVID, because researchers could post their data and have it publicly available without waiting for the many months of peer review and publication processing and proofing required prior to publication in an established medical journal.
 Paul and I read his posted pre-print review and were shocked. The conclusions did not match the data. For the first time in my career, I found myself reading a scientific manuscript by a researcher presenting such profound and compelling data yet whose conclusions argued against the findings. If there is anything that scientists and researchers tend to do when publishing original work, is that they tend to over-interpret the potential importance and impact of their data. But here there was such overwhelmingly positive data yet the paper and conclusions read as if the conclusions were very uncertain and too “heterogenous” to act on.
 In addition, it was poorly written, with repeated expressions of the limitations of the data including false statements about how effective concentrations could not be reached with standard dosing (something we knew Andy knew was false). In addition the conclusion did not match the data presented. Paul and I immediately suspected scientific misconduct was occurring so we immediately wrote to Andy with our concerns and provided him with a complete peer-review of his paper containing our many comments and recommendations for changes.  We demanded that he immediately take down his paper and implement the suggested revisions to be more consistent with the existing data. Among other demands, we asked that he remove the statements about how effective concentrations could not be reached in the blood with standard doses (we had as a group presented data disproving that to the NIH). Further we called out the numerous irregularities in his paper like the repetitive citation of the “limitations” of the data presented.
 We knew something was off, like really off and so did Tess. But we didn’t know exactly what was going on “behind the scenes.” It was not until a year later when we found out who and what were behind these manipulations trying to distort and suppress the evidence of efficacy of ivermectin. Those details were uncovered by a man named Phil Harper. I consider him a polymath with a diverse background of interests and accomplishments having worked in journalism and documentary filmmaking among other pursuits. He was a UK citizen and had been living in India during the early pandemic and was shocked when he returned to UK in mid-to-late 2021 and found a country without any early treatment strategy that was instead attacking, suppressing, and legislating against ivermectin which was in wide use at the time in India. So he dug into the topic. Note his Substack is called “the Digger” and it is masterful . What he discovered about the events that occurred over those weeks is absolutely stunning. I credit his work and his publications on his Substack with much of the finer and personal details of what I will present as having happened over those weeks. Please read it.  Please also consider donating to help fund his proposed documentary project called “The Research Cartel. ” I believe it will have major impacts on exposing all that is rotten in medical research.
 In regards to Andy’s preprint paper, again, the most stunning abnormality was the wording and content of the conclusion. It was markedly different than the version of his paper that he had sent Tess a week prior. I know this now because Phil performed a “document analysis” directly comparing all changes from the version that Andy had sent to Tess with the one that was posted on the preprint server. He found numerous changes inserted to the later preprint version. Every single change softened or reversed the importance of the findings and/or argued against the efficacy of ivermectin. A really weird statement about “what is sufficient for review by regulatory authorities” appeared.
 However despite this paper and its muted conclusions and numerous limitations and suggestions, it went further and argued “more studies needed to be done.” While people were dying at horrific rates around the world and all the available RCT evidence (plus OCT and Health Ministry data), were showing that one of the safest, least expensive, and widely available medicines in history could save lives in a global pandemic of a highly transmissible, viral illness.
 Andy knew the importance of this finding too. In several public lectures he gave that month, he was as enthusiastic and supportive of ivermectin as Paul, Tess, and I were. He did an interview with a French publication called Bon Sens (they were one of my first interviews after my testimony in the Senate) and he even emphasized the “dose-dependent” effects of ivermectin. Note that a “dose dependent relationship“ is one of the strongest pillars of support for efficacy of a therapeutic, defined as measuring greater benefits as the dose is increased). This is what he said at the time:
 We are seeing very clear antiviral effects. We see smaller effects when the drug is given for one day,  then in dose-ranging studies, we see more and more of an effect. And then if the drug is given at a high dose, for five days, we see the strongest effect. So, how could that be happening if the drug does not stop the virus from replicating? It simply does. It does. And we’ve got the evidence to prove it…. It’s just a matter of time before it gets approved.”
 Tess knew even more than we did that something really rotten was going on. She knew that someone had altered his paper and his conclusions and his analysis. She asked him for a Zoom meeting to discuss, and he agreed! She recorded the meeting illegally and thus was reluctant to make it public for a time, but as the war went on with ever increasing devastation to the human race, she eventually decided to make the video public.
 It is an astounding video. Andy actually admitted to Tess that his “sponsors” influenced the writing of the paper. Tess asked him for names but he refused. And we all know that whoever had altered that paper they were not listed as an author of the paper. This was clear scientific misconduct. She included the most relevant parts of this meeting in a devastatingly effective video called “A Letter to Andrew Hill” which essentially covers all of the most relevant and impactful events that I am detailing in these posts. I have included it at the end of Part 2. It is a must watch and likely communicates more than I ever can with words. Please hang in, hold, read this through, and then watch the video.
 Now at that time, even before Phil Harper came on the scene, Paul and I were in lots of communication with a man named Lynden Alexander who was “investigating” all the shenanigans around the lack of a recommendation early in in the pandemic for the use of corticosteroids in severe, hospitalized COVID patients (recall that my first Senate testimony in Senator Ron Johnson’s hearings was in May of 2020 when I called out the critical need for corticosteroids in COVID).
 Lynden was a deeply expert and wickedly intelligent “forensic science communication expert.”Among many of his skills, he does linguistic analyses. He began to examine in great detail the language, grammar, and writing style(s) of the preprint version of the paper, without knowing Tess had a different version from days earlier (Phil is the one who found that out). However, despite not knowing this, he was convinced there were multiple ‘voices’ appearing within the paper. For at least one of those voices, English was a second language. Further, based on the language used, he knew that this person was involved in regulatory activities. That was in January of 2021 when he told Paul and I about this. It was not until Phil Harper came on the scene in February of 2022 that we learned who that person was.
 Now, from Phil Harper’s analysis of the two versions of the paper, these were the principal changes inserted:
 “Preliminary” was added to the title.

 In the section on funding, “Unrestricted research grant provided by Unitaid” was removed.

 A new “limitations” section was added to the introduction. This was what had freaked me out the most about Andy’s preprint paper. When publishing original research and analysis, there is always a section which highlights the limitations of the data presented and the conclusions that can be made. The standard location of this section is at or near the end of the paper, just before or at the end of the “Discussion/Conclusions” section. Andy did have a “limitations” section at the end as was standard, however, in the new version, a second, additional “limitations” section popped up at the end of the introduction. Before the methods and results were presented . What the hell is this I thought? It was as if someone was trying really hard to weaken the importance of the data presented.

 An emboldened discussion section was added, and in it, a new sentence was inserted: " Furthermore, there was a wide variation in standards of care across trials, and ivermectin dose and duration of treatment was heterogeneous."

 An additional ‘limitation’ sentence was added on page 7: “Limitations of current analysis is important as it is being performed with secondary data from a wide variety of different trials in many different parts of the world with designs that were not originally meant to be compatible. Further refined analysis, including direct data examination, are warranted."

 Note that Lynden had identified this exact sentence as one which had likely been inserted, even though he was not aware of the existence of the January 14th paper that Phil had compared it to when he compiled his report.

 Lynden also noted that the language of the insertions was different from the language and style employed in the rest of the paper. The verb conjugations were ‘off’ in these new sentences but were not in the rest of the paper. He concluded there were at least two voices within the paper: one was a native English speaker, and the other was not.

 In Part 2 of “the Fix at the WHO” I introduce the identity of the researchers and detail the actions they took in manipulating not only Andy but also the WHO’s recommendation against use of ivermectin issued on March 31, 2021. Go to my Substack main page for Part 2. It is devastating.

 I just want to say how much I appreciate all the subscribers to my Substack, and especially the paid ones! Your support is so greatly appreciated.
 Subscribe now
 P.S. I opened a tele-health clinic providing care not only in the prevention and treatment of acute COVID, but with a specialized focus on the study and treatment of both Long-Haul and Post-Vaccination injury syndromes. If anyone needs our help, feel free to visit our website at www.drpierrekory.com.
 P.P.S. I am getting professional help (hah!) to write a book about what I have personally witnessed and learned during Pharma’s historic Disinformation war on ivermectin.  Pre-order here for:

Summary: The biggest battle in the war on ivermectin was won by Pharma at the WHO and has since caused millions of preventable deaths. I had a front row seat to how it all unfolded.


My Op-Ed In The Washington Times On D.C's Latest Insane Public Health Policy Decision

We in the FLCCC are on a roll lately with publishing Op-Ed’s in major newspapers. I have to admit that I get expert help with these Op-Ed’s because, if you read my “Medical Musings” Substack, you know that my writing tone/style just doesn’t cut it for most major media. But when I/we get fired up about the latest absurdity in Public Health Policy (piled atop what is now a Mount Everest of policy absurdities), the team gets together and we try to call it out. We do this to help a public that has been consistently victimized by endless false propaganda and destructive censorship of valuable information around COVID vaccines and treatments. It should go without saying that the information control is wielded by Big Pharma via the captured Federal Health Agencies and the sponsoring of all corporate media and high-impact medical journals.
 Weaponizing the agencies, journals, and major media to serve Big Pharma’s interests has killed hundreds of thousands in this country alone, either by depriving access to effective, repurposed drugs or by forcing people to take lethal mRNA “vaccines.” Many more will be killed if we don’t put a stop to this and make some headway against this continued onslaught of toxic information. Information that school districts, Universities, and many corporations act on by instituting mandates that force many U.S citizens to accept a novel, toxic medical intervention in order to maintain their income or education. These mandates continue despite the now well-publicized and CDC admitted fact that the “vaccines” do not prevent transmission. Worse, the latest data actually shows that the vaccinated are 5x more likely to transmit disease. Yet they are widely mandated. Like I said, an absurdity atop absurdities.
 My Op-Ed was written in response to the recent decision by the District of Columbia to mandate COVID vaccination for all children above the age of 12 in order to attend public school. I almost cannot sleep at what is about to happen to all those poor, defenseless children, given that the majority of them are likely parented by someone who has been pumped full of false, pro-vaccine beliefs. See below, published today in the Washington Times.
 DC’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate will hurt those its meant to protect
 It would bar nearly two-thirds of Black adolescents from attending school

 By Pierre Kory - - Tuesday, August 23, 2022
 OPINION:
 While the attention was focused on Mar-a-Lago, Denmark made major news by banning the COVID-19 vaccine for children under age 18. You read that correctly: The Scandinavian nation, often heralded by pro-vaccine liberal politicians as a health model for the United States, issued a policy declaring it “no longer be possible” for young people to get vaccinated, citing the low risk posed by the virus.
 Meanwhile, back home, the Biden administration, whose inner circle includes secret consultants for Pfizer, is for the most part letting states move forward with a similar laissez-faire attitude toward vaccination requirements with one notable exception: Washington, D.C., which is requiring all students over the age of 12 receive a vaccine.
 The discrepancy between the treatment of children in our nation’s capital and the rest of the country reflects a deeper disconnect ripping our nation apart. It also undermines President Biden’s commitment to racial equity. On the campaign trail, Mr. Biden, who owes his 2020 victory to Black voters in South Carolina, turned heads by declaring, “if you have a problem figuring out whether you’re for me or Trump then you ain’t Black.” On Inauguration Day, he signed an executive order outlining his “comprehensive approach to advancing equity for all.”
 Yet when Team Biden moved back to Washington, they found a region moving away from its “Chocolate City” roots. In 1977 when Mr. Biden was a first-term senator, D.C. was 77% Black. Today, that number has been cut nearly in half to just 41%.
 The city’s gentrification has deepened inequality. Every latte shop or yoga studio in the Navy Yard or Logan Circle pushes lower-income Washingtonians east of the Anacostia River, where Wards 7 and 8 remain nearly 80% Black and with average income less than half its counterparts across the river.
 If enforced, Washington’s vaccine mandate would bar nearly two-thirds of Black adolescents from attending school, creating another obstacle for a population government should be empowering. The elite ruling class is happy to plaster “Black Lives Matters” stickers on their Teslas while supporting policies that hold back the next generation mere miles away.
 Over socially distanced glasses of chardonnay, well-to-do Beltway residents cling to their COVID-19 narrative where vaccines funded by the big pharmaceutical companies offer the only hope. In their world, no one — not even children — is safe without a vaccine. Anyone who dares deviate from the company line is dismissed as a backwater Trump-supporting conspiracist, even lifelong Democrats like me.
 They ignore data that challenges their point of view, including data finding 70% of U.S. public schools reported an increase in students seeking mental health services since the start of the pandemic, or a Harvard University study showing “remote instruction was a primary driver of widening achievement gaps.”
 These districts are not in places where parents can earn their six-figure salaries from Zoom, ordering Uber Eats and enjoying a steady diet of Netflix.
 As a medical doctor who has helped more than 700 patients recover from COVID-19 and its complications, I have treated numerous adults and children injured by the vaccine and can assure you that there is a significant cause for concern. I’ve outlined the large and growing body of data on the injury risks of COVID-19 vaccinations — particularly among healthy children — which you can read in a vaccine exemption letter that I provided to concerned parents who wanted to send their children to summer camp without exposing them to these risks.
 The true scope of harm is difficult to grasp because our public health agencies refuse to engage in the debate for fear of undermining their preferred narrative. But there are plenty of signals. Consider the large, unexplained rise in U.S. life insurance claims among working Americans of ages 18-64 beginning in early to mid-2021, when the vaccination campaign began. A similar trend is evident in German health insurance claims data — and the CEO of one of the country’s largest health insurance companies was fired for releasing data suggesting the government was concealing the extent of vaccine injuries.
 Two years ago, candidate Joe Biden pledged to “shut down the virus.” Now, with more deaths on his watch than his predecessor’s, he and his allies still refuse to change course. Instead, they are clinging to a failed political agenda, sacrificing the next generation at its altar. Washington’s vaccine mandates will hurt Black children the most, undermining Mr. Biden’s equity agenda. In November, let’s hope a reckoning is brewing for those who have suffered the most from a failed public health response. Our children, especially the most underserved, depend on it.
 • Dr. Pierre Kory is president and chief medical officer of the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance.

 I just want to say how much I appreciate all the subscribers to my Substack, and especially the paid ones! Your support is so greatly appreciated.
 Subscribe now
 P.S. I opened a tele-health clinic providing care not only in the prevention and treatment of acute COVID, but with a specialized focus on the study and treatment of both Long-Haul and Post-Vaccination injury syndromes. If anyone needs our help, feel free to visit our website at www.drpierrekory.com.
 P.P.S. I am getting professional help (hah!) to write a book about what I have personally witnessed and learned during Pharma’s historic Disinformation war on ivermectin.  Pre-order here for:

Summary: The District of Columbia just mandated highly toxic and increasingly lethal COVID-19 "vaccines" for all students over the age of 12 to attend public school. We are living inside of a horror movie.


Massive Miscarriage Rates Among Vaccinated Pregnant Women Found Buried In The Pfizer Documents

Let’s start with the fact the PFDA (the P is not a typo) asked a federal court for 75 years to make public the many thousands of pages of data submitted to them by Pfizer to support the EUA they (the PFDA ) issued.
 One interpretation of this action is that they wanted the data to stay hidden for a long time to hide fraud and/or criminality (same thing). The other is that they only had enough staff to complete this task within 75 years. Let’s ignore the 2nd one as absurd on its face (especially since they seem to be pouring out documents monthly after the judge ordered them to). Where there is a will there is a way apparently.
 Now why would they want to keep the data hidden? What lies within the realm of possibilities is that at the time they went to court, they knew the EUA and the resulting massive national and global vaccine campaign were pre-determined and independent of whatever “science” emerged to support or not support the campaign. Unfortunately for them, the “science” was not supportive. At all. So they tried to suppress the serious troubling toxicity and lack of efficacy data contained within those documents.
 Well the court ordered them to make public thousands of pages of documents each month. My hypothesis above seems to be validated by the uncovering of what is not just troubling, but absolutely terrifying data on the lack of safety in pregnancy. While Dr Naomi Wolf and the WarRoom/DailyClout Research Volunteers recently corrected a report that overcounted miscarriages in one section of the Pfizer documents, they are right to have early and often called attention to signals about this issue overall. Indeed in May 2022, they broke the story of another section of the Pfizer documents, in which the mortality rate of fetuses and babies of women vaccinated with Pfizer’s mRNA injection was about 80 per cent.
 Now, let’s do a dive on just one page of the many thousands. See below, Section 5.3.6, Page 12 of the document called “Cumulative Analysis of Post-Authorization Adverse Event Reports.”

 Looking at the first bullet under the header:
 Pregnancy cases: 274 cases including:
 In this paragraph, at first read, it is just a list of adverse events and numbers, detailed in a way that is confusing at best, and obfuscating at worst. I think it is the latter because, if you do some simple arithmetic trying to parse that paragraph, you end up with this:
 270 pregnancies were reported in vaccinated women during the first 12 weeks of the vaccine campaign. In 238 of them, “no outcome was provided.” So, they only knew the outcome of 32 pregnancies reported. What happened in those 32 pregnancies they followed up on?
 My hands are literally trembling as I write this, but here goes. In these 32 pregnancies, there were:
 23 spontaneous abortions

 2 spontaneous abortions with intra-uterine death
 So, 25 of the 32 pregnancies with known outcomes resulted in a miscarriage, a rate of 78%. Note that miscarriage normally occurs in only 12-15% of pregnancies

 2 premature births with neonatal death

 1 spontaneous abortion with neonatal death

 1 normal outcome

 Note that this only adds up to 29 known outcomes, but then they note that “two different outcomes were reported for each twin” and then they talk about “fetus/baby cases as separate from mother cases.” I have no idea how to interpret this explanation of outcomes, so it may have been one or two less (or more) deaths then.
 So, of the 32 pregnancies they knew the outcome of, 87.5% resulted in the death of the fetus or neonate. Burying this data in the way and not alerting the world to what they found, is criminal activity yet again. This is what they do and have always done when one of their novel products begins to cause death. It is just these kinds of actions that hav resulted in the billions of criminal and civil fines they have paid in the last 20 years alone . They have done this with numerous newly launched medications such as Avandia, Bextra, Vioxx, and let’s not forget oxycodone. Many hundreds of thousands of deaths have resulted with the burying of adverse event and death data around newly launched products until they are caught, pay massive fines, and then carry on doing the same thing.
 Check out this article reviewing their decades of criminality in which this quote appears:
 While the defense industry used to be the biggest defrauder of the federal government under the False Claims Act (FCA), a law enacted in 1863 to prevent defense contractor fraud, the pharmaceutical industry has greatly overtaken the defense industry in recent years.  The pharmaceutical industry now tops not only the defense industry, but all other industries in the total amount of fraud payments for actions taken against the federal government under the False Claims Act."
 This one is bigger though. And maybe why I keep hearing of a bunch of folks now starting to short their stock as they see this fraud as potentially bankrupting these companies. Maybe, maybe not. They are really good at surviving their frauds and scandals.
 Further, in looking at the Pfizer documents more broadly you find so many fragmentations and obfuscations of data in the way they present the data, combined with inexplicable categorizations of deaths as unrelated to the vaccine when they could never have known that (yet should have assumed it until proven otherwise). No wonder it takes an army of volunteers months to dissect and pull out what the actual data indicates.
 Now, ignoring and obfuscating the massive toxicity to the fetuses of pregnant women exposed to the vaccine also has major implications on fertility .
 And this is where it gets even more horrifying. Birth rates are plummeting in many countries around the world, but the way in which they are plummeting is unprecedented. They are large drops, and they are occurring, almost like clockwork, approximately 9 months after pregnant women around the world started to be vaccinated . This is occurring after women the world over were told it is “safe and effective” in pregnancy despite the fact the trials did not include pregnant women .
 Yet, in the first 12 week post-vaccine rollout surveillance report submitted by Pfizer to the PFDA, of the 270 pregnancies reported, they followed 32 of them and found a horrifying rate of fetal/neonatal deaths. Again stirs up memories of one of the most historically shocking statements ever uttered by an FDA voting member, my “friend” Eric Rubin, editor-in-chief of my favorite journal, the New England Journal of Medicine (this is a joke), “but we’re never going to learn about how safe this vaccine is unless we start giving it.” Dr. Rubin and I have a little history. In a NY Times Magazine article which partly profiled me, he was quoted as saying I “got lucky” when I testified in the Senate on the critical need for corticosteroids in hospitalized COVID patients in May of 2020, months before Oxford’s trial made it the standard of care overnight.
 Well they started giving it all right. Now let’s see if there are any data to suggest the vaccines are having an impact on birth rates. Note that although birth rates can vary from year to year, and have small peaks and valleys within the year, you don’t typically see large decreases suddenly from one month to the other, in numerous countries around the world. This data is even more horrifying, some of which I obtained from Peter Imanuelson’s Substack called the Freedom Corner with Peter Sweden .
 In Stockholm during the first quarter of 2022, birth rates plummeted by 14%, shocking a Professor in Demographics:
 "It is a drastic and remarkable reduction beyond the usual. We have never seen anything like this before, that the bottom just falls out in just one quarter" said Gunnar Andersson, professor in demographics at Stockholm University to Dagens Nyheter.
 As someone who has been witness to massive censorship, much of it voluntary (i.e self-censorship), what the Professor says next is completely expected and in-line with what is now almost two years of many leading (cowardly) scientists, researchers and physicians who have willingly avoided making conclusions that might put the vaccines in a bad light, despite the immensely disturbing data on COVID vaccine toxicity screaming from VAERS, the life insurance industry, and disability statistics since the roll-out. Here is what he says in a newspaper interview :
 "It correlates exactly in time with the mass vaccination program in April, May last year. People understood that the lock downs ended and now we had to go out in the world again. Demographists in other parts of Europe see the same timing" the professor said.
 His interpretation is that lockdowns ended, vaccines were provided, thus giving everyone the freedom to start newly re-exploring the world instead of making babies? Although I find this almost too absurd to explore, I will say this: Sweden never really had any significant lock-downs. I am so sick and tired of hearing idiotic alternative explanations for truly disturbing data on the vaccines. Things like “anyone can put a report into VAERS”, or “working age people died at higher rates because of unemployment and deaths of despair.” Yet in 2021, lockdowns were over, unemployment rates were at historic lows, and drug overdoses have been on a fairly constant (but not precipitous) rise for years. I could go on, but you know what I am talking about, the constant explaining away of “inconvenient truths," with my personal favorite (favorite is not the right word), the explosion in articles about Sudden Adult Death Syndrome in trying to explain all the healthy, active young people dropping dead all over the world.
 Now check out Germany’s first quarter births compared to the first quarter in previous years:

 Switzerland data from the Swiss Policy Research Report here :

 Hungary is down 20% since the vaccine roll-out and this massive decrease was addressed by one member of parliament is this widely circulated video from the RAIR foundation. Other reports are even more shocking: Taiwan is down 27%, UK, North Dakota are reporting 12-13% declines, and Norway 6.2%. Admittedly these are a subset of countries, this is not meant to be a comprehensive analysis globally, but the month to month drop still needs explaining.
 Further, disastrous impacts on fertility should not come as a surprise. Although censored, many in my network were aware of massive Facebook groups of women reporting and discussing severe menstrual irregularities as a result of these “vaccines.” These groups were shut down by Facebook. Remember, the vaccination campaign had only one enemy: “vaccine hesitancy” and our Federal government paid $1 Billion to media companies to support a favorable view of the vaccines. Massive groups of women reporting severe menstrual irregularities would drive vaccine hesitancy, so such talk must be suppressed at all costs (or minimal cost to Facebook).
 We knew about the University of Illinois researchers who were trying to survey 5,000 women to study the effects on menstruation and were besieged with over 30,000 responses in like a day or two. The results were disturbing (and were either explained away as temporary or just ignored).
 Google searches find many dozens of articles actually addressing the widespread menstrual irregularities reported by women but always concluding the problems were transient/temporary. But never forget the inaction, ignoring, and suppression of these data by the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology (ACOG). Never forget the Infectious Disease Society of America’s (IDSA) distortion and rejecting of the immense data supporting ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine. Never forget the American Neurological Association and American Heart Associations ignoring of the massive rises in strokes and heart attacks among young healthy people with no co-morbidities. Never forget the Deans of the nations’ 126 Academic Medical Centers who had to have been aware of what was happening in their University hospitals, yet said and did nothing. It is an endless list of leaders in Academic Medicine who either were cowardly or willfully complicit in the suppression and ignoring of these data or who simply fell victim to what should have been easily detectable propaganda.
 I appreciate the efforts of some who explore alternative “hypotheses” to explain these suddenly dropping birth rates. Fine, prove them. Unless you can, as per the now ignored, but long standing regulatory standard, when a new medicine or device is introduced, you must first assume any adverse effects or deaths reported to be related to the intervention until proven otherwise . That is what I am doing here. We must assume the vaccines are impacting fertility unless some other provable or credible explanations for a sudden drop in month to month birth rates. So stop the shots until you can prove they are not (this would be the 189th reason to stop the shots).
 Too many young people dying , too many becoming disabled , too many pregnancies resulting in fetal or neonatal death as above, and now we find out that if we continue with this vaccine obsession, they will not be replaced. This is a humanitarian catastrophe heaped atop the one caused by dangerous gain-of-function research. When will the world wake up to this rapidly unfolding horror ? For those of us who know what is going on, it is hard not to feel helpless as we are forced to watch increasingly apparent and widespread needless death . But we will continue to try to get these truths out despite the massive censorship and propaganda overwhelming the globe. We have a moral and ethical obligation and take that responsibility seriously no matter what befalls us. Stop the vaccines, now. And if we can’t stop them, we must try to convince everyone we know to no longer agree to get vaccinated. Their lives and our future depend on it.

 I just want to say how much I appreciate all the subscribers to my Substack, and especially the paid ones! Your support is so greatly appreciated.
 Subscribe now
 P.S. I opened a tele-health clinic providing care not only in the prevention and treatment of acute COVID, but with a specialized focus on the study and treatment of both Long-Haul and Post-Vaccination injury syndromes. If anyone needs our help, feel free to visit our website at www.drpierrekory.com.
 P.P.S. I am getting professional help (hah!) to write a book about what I have personally witnessed and learned during Pharma’s historic Disinformation war on ivermectin.  Pre-order here for:

Summary: The pharmaceutical industry has committed crimes for decades, paying $30 billion in civil and criminal fines since 2000. The Pfizer documents reveal their latest criminal assault on our health.


What to Know About The Novavax Injection

A subscriber asked me to write a post about my thoughts on Novavax because she “really trusts my judgement.” Flattered, I felt like I should share what they are. So here goes.
 Before any medical intervention, but especially in the case of a novel or barely tested one, a long standing practice of medical ethics is that informed consent must be obtained. The emphasis should be on the informed part and not the consent part. Note that informed consent has been one of the foundations of medical ethics, essentially an inviolable standard, or at least it used to be before this “emergency” came along where now you have pharmacists injecting children with barely a mention of the risks , “because they might be too scared to take the shot.”
 Informed consent discussions are simple in structure but often complex and time-consuming to conduct. It relies on providing the patient with as detailed and comprehensive a knowledge of the risks, benefits, and alternatives to the intervention.
 So, should we go through an informed consent discussion with the novel Novavax injection? Actually, I would not. Why? Because I don’t hold informed consent discussions for interventions I do not recommend or would not want my patient to consider. I instead tell them not to consider and give them my reasons for that recommendation. Thus, I only conduct informed consent discussion for interventions that I feel would bring about greater benefits than risks (generally much greater), and I would only do so for patients with active illness in order to get them better. A vaccine is a much different proposition as they are given to patients without disease.
 Why would I not even consider Novavax as a reasonable option? Simple:
 There has never been a successful or safe coronavirus vaccine. The last 18 months have shown that COVID vaccines lead to increased chances of getting ill, equal or increased chances of transmitting, and higher likelihood of entering hospital and dying. And that is leaving unmentioned the lethality and toxicity of the mRNA platform ones. See my “Vaccine Exemption Letter” post for the data to support these statements. The coronavirus is a rapidly mutating virus, thus vaccines will always be non-neutralizing because by the time they are manufactured and ready for injection, the virus has mutated into forms poorly responsive to older, narrower antibodies.

 Novavax is still formulated with a two and a half year-old protein for this rapidly mutagenic coronavirus, so it would be like giving a two and a half year old flu shot for this years flu (worse actually). Yet our health system, including every single academic medical center in the country is still mandating and eager to adopt use of an outdated viral protein. I would love to say this is beyond belief, but this is the world we live in now.

 We now have the omicron variant circulating, which is generally well tolerated by most, particularly those who are healthy or young (and even the old), and especially those with natural immunity .

 The country now has abundant natural immunity, which even the CDC now admits offers equal protection (actually, natural immunity offers better protection but let’s give the CDC some credit for telling at least a partial truth). So why are we still vaccinating and/or mandating in those who have recovered from COVID?

 Vaccinating against respiratory viruses works very poorly as the antibodies do not reach high concentrations in the nasal and respiratory mucosa which is where the virus enters. The flu vaccine is almost completely ineffective, even when you get this years flu shot. Not known by most.

 Vaccinating against respiratory viruses with non-neutralizing vaccines actually weakens and warps the immune system such that you are more likely to get other respiratory viruses or illnesses as well (this has been well reported after flu vaccinations given that those vaccinated against the flu are more susceptible to other respiratory viral infections).

 Proposing a novel and barely tested product coming out of the pharmaceutical industry to a patient is a wicked proposition in modern times. Note the pharmaceutical industry is a documented criminal industry which has repeatedly put out unsafe and ineffective products (even deadly, i.e opioids, Avandia, Vioxx, Bextra, the list goes on), followed by burying the adverse event data while pushing their wares through control of professional societies, federal/state legislation, and captured agencies. They have paid over $12 billion in criminal fines and over $16 billion in civil fines, just in the last 20 years across the 20 largest settlements . Their history of these actions stretches even longer.

 The history of criminality around the COVID vaccines dwarfs any actions the industry has done in the past. The Pfizer documents that the PFDA (the P is not a typo) tried to hide for 75 years reveal insane amounts of manipulations to try to show they work and are safe. They didn’t and weren’t. Further the testimony from the Ventavia/Pfizer whistleblower Brook Jackson reveals that the studies were so poorly done with such little follow-up of patients that they are simply not credible. Remember, Pharma. Does. Not. Care. About. Your. Health. Just your wallet (actually the government’s wallet, which I suppose is also your wallet).

 So, conceptually, I think the idea of getting any coronavirus vaccine at this point is preposterous. However, let’s try to do a more traditional informed consent using the structure of risks/benefits/alternatives. The following is what I think other providers (or pharmacists egads) should be telling people prior to offering them Novavax, or more accurately, in order to get them to avoid it.
 Yes, Novavax is a “non-mRNA" vaccine and is designed more along the line of a traditional vaccine in that an amount of viral protein is injected into the arm, it is then recognized as a “foreign” protein by our immune system which then makes antibodies against it. These antibodies are then thought (“hoped” remember) to help clear the virus rapidly and efficiently after exposure such that we avoid illness. Sounds good on paper. Not. Just ask Geert Vanden Bossche, one of the worlds top immunologists and vaccine experts.
 RISKS
 Novavax delivers the spike protein. As a self-described clinical expert in spike-protein induced disease, the spike protein is a pathogen. A pathogen is a substance or organism that is capable of inducing illness. Note that I call myself an expert because there are very few of us out here studying it’s pathogenicity, however I would argue Professor Paul Marik has taken the lead across the globe in amassing all the basic science and clinical research underlying the knowledge of the mechanisms and treatments of spike-protein induced diseases. That scholarly document is in evolution, and has over 300 scientific references at this point, with rapid evolutions and additions each week. Note that it appears to be the world’s sole “comprehensive” scholarly work on spike protein pathogenicity and empirically proposed treatments.
 Another great sadness about the US COVID response is that almost the entire health system and all of academia have yet to recognize the spike as a pathogen or formulate any approach to treating Long-Haul or Post-Vaccine Injury. Until they do, they will continue to fail to recognize the causes or mechanisms of these syndromes as well as to offer effective treatments. And, it goes without saying, they will not be able to discuss this in their ill-informed consent discussions. Their deplorable failure at treating these disabling diseases is astounding and will continue for the foreseeable future. Remember, the system docs won’t treat because they are all members of the Church of RCT Fundamentalism (a.k.a “evidence based medicine.”) You know, where they will sit there paralyzed until some massive randomized controlled trial is published in a high-impact medical journal and then is recommended by a federal agency or national medical society. You know what that system produces by now if you read my Substack. Not only will it leave patients untreated for months to years, but while the docs sit around waiting, Pharma, via the agencies and media, will suppress or attack any generic medicines or supplements that front-line doctors and patients have found effective. They will do this with ferocity and depravity until such a time they can “save the day” with the massive promotion of a novel, pricey Big Pharma pill which they will get our government to pay for at a price they set. Think about what happened to ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine until Pharma saved the day with the pathetic and poisonous Paxlovid using our government coffers. Rinse repeat here.
 The two major and complex diseases unleashed by the spike are what we call “long haul” and “post-vaccine injury” syndromes. I probably should differentiate post-vaccine into two subtypes, with one being an acute, sudden death syndrome caused by massive heart attacks, myocarditis (which can cause lethal arrhythmias or pump failure), and/or massive strokes. Excess mortality amongst the vaccinated in 2021 skyrocketed and is showing up in Life Insurance industry data in both the U.S and other countries. However I don’t see those events in my practice because they are sudden deaths occurring in asymptomatic patients (who are often swimming or running or doing something else fun until they suddenly drop dead). My practice instead sees patients who suffer with the more chronic subtype consisting of myriad, disabling symptoms across multiple organ systems. Now, whether there is enough spike in Novavax to produce similar deadly events or chronic syndromes in the future, who knows. More on that below.
 SHORT TERM RISK DATA
 Not looking good here folks. Let’s take a look at the actual published trial of Novavax, and their chart detailing the “side effects." Then let’s compare it to Pfizers mRNA “vaccine” trial published in December 2020. Look carefully. I will interpret these charts below.

 Here is how I interpret the data:
 The “local” and “systemic” adverse events are absurdly high in both. I remember thinking back in December 2020 when I was reading the Pfizer trial, I said to myself, “Wow, that does NOT look friendly!” Not just the wickedly high frequency of really sore arms with redness and swelling, but the very high rates of “systemic symptoms” of fatigue, headache, chills, vomiting, muscle pain. Very high rates of those. Ouch.

 Next, look at the “dose response,” meaning look at the incidence of adverse events after the 2nd shot compared to the 1st shot. If it is higher after the 2nd, it indicates a “dose-response relationship,” which, when we are talking about a therapeutic, is a pillar of evidence to support the efficacy of the drug. For instance, ivermectin in COVID has a strong dose response relationship, meaning the higher the dose, the more effective it is (that is why all the high impact trials tried as much as they could to limit the dose of ivermectin, in particular during history’s most fraudulent trial called the TOGETHER trial ).

 Conversely, a dose-response in terms of side effects is a pillar of the measure of toxicity . The more you give, the sicker you get. Not cool. Now take a look at Pfizers published chart above, keeping in mind, these are only the short term systemic side effects.
 Pfizer: fatigue goes from 47% after the 1st to 59% after the 2nd in young folks and 34% up to 51% in older folks. Chills: 14% to 35% in young, 6% to 23% in old. Same pattern and increases with muscle pains and also joint pains and use of anti-pyretic medications.

 Now, take a look at Novavax. Note how they don’t give you the numeral percentages and instead make you crane your neck and use a ruler to estimate the actual incidences and increases. But just looking at the height of the bars from shot 1 to shot 2 and the increases in the yellow at the tops of the bars (yellow = “Grade 3” reactions - i.e. more severe), you see again what looks like a scary shot to me with some of the local and systemic events reported even higher than with Pfizer’s mRNA shot! So, is Novavax safer?

 LONG TERM SIDE EFFECTS . Unknown. Remember the famous, “I guess we will just have to give it to see how safe it is” by one of the nations top vaccine experts. I swear, again, and I say this often, you just cannot make this stuff up. So, an informed consent discussion should relate that long term side effects are unknown. Remember as well, we are not in a supposed “emergency” anymore, despite the fact our government keeps renewing its emergency powers. If the person conducting this discussion tries to argue that in terms of long term effects, it is safe and effective because the mRNA vaccines were safe and effective, that is so categorically ridiculous it does not even bare addressing. Again, read my “Vaccine Exemption Letter” post for the data on toxicity and lethality of those vaccines. Do not proceed. My caution would be that spike protein is a pathogen with sequences that we know generate antibodies that then are capable of attacking many tissues (what are called autoantibodies which cause a category of diseases called “auto-immune” diseases). Also, spike protein, when broken down by the body is known to generate amyloid like fragments which are highly thrombogenic (i.e. cause clotting). Spike protein also stimulates immune cells called monocytes and macrophages which disturb numerous organ functions. Spike protein is also toxic to mitochondria which are the energy producing parts of each cell. In summary, don’t sign up for any more spike protein than is already circulating in the world.
 Also, Novavax, like the mRNA vaccines uses “nanoparticles” in a “saponin-based adjuvant” solution which is novel and proprietary, patented only in 2020. Well, thats reassuring no? Their published paper states that the adjuvant and the vaccine was found to be “safe and immunogenic” in Phase 1 and 2 trials. Then I found this in the supplementary appendix from one of the earlier trials, ”the mechanism of Matrix-M1 (the adjuvant) is not well defined, but it has been associated with a potent induction of leukocyte activation and migration into the draining lymph nodes in their previous study.” Not reassuring.
 EFFICACY
 Unknown, but likely ineffective as it has not been tested against Omicron, or any of its sub-variants or whatever future variant will be circulating when it rolls out. Plus, as we know now, all the predicted efficacy reported from COVID-19 vaccine trials were never observed in the real-world, again likely due to trial shenanigans and data manipulations and removal and/or miscategorization of those who fell ill during the trial or simply due to the fact the virus is rapidly mutating. Even if it were effective, we know from the past two years, it would be short lived. I again have to mention natural immunity. It already protects against severe disease and reasonably well from re-infection, and there is no credible data to suggest adding an even older spike protein vaccine using a newly patented adjuvant will better protect you or make you healthier.
 ALTERNATIVES TO VACCINATION
 For readers of my Substack, you all know that you can always just skip the vaccine and instead just rely on early treatment which has been shown to be near perfectly effective in achieving rapid recovery and avoidance of hospitalization and death, especially when given in synergistic combinations like the FLCCC ’s or the AAPS’s protocols. In fact, as you know, no vaccine would ever get an EUA or approval if effective treatments were available. Further, there are now over three dozen effective treatments supported by controlled trials, with many of them repurposed and/or over the counter. I suppose you could also just rely on Paxlovid given its demonstration of such incredible efficacy in treating President Biden and Dr. Fauci.
 Hope this helps.

 I just want to say how much I appreciate all the subscribers to my substack, and especially the paid ones! Your support is so greatly appreciated.
 Subscribe now
 P.S. I opened a tele-health clinic providing care not only in the prevention and treatment of acute COVID, but with a specialized focus on the study and treatment of both Long-Haul and Post-Vaccination injury syndromes. If anyone needs our help, feel free to visit our website at www.drpierrekory.com.
 P.P.S. I am getting professional help (hah!) to write a book about what I have personally witnessed and learned during Pharma’s historic Disinformation war on ivermectin.  Pre-order here for:

Summary: The idea of accepting an injection of spike protein hoping it is safe or effective is absurd. Yet, many are again forced to make a decision threatening their health and ability to support their family


The Miracle Not-Heard Around The World: The Success of Uttar Pradesh - Part 3

In Part 1 and Part 2 , I laid out the structure, function, and escalation of Uttar Pradesh’s (UP) “Test, Track, and Treat”(TTT) Program, which achieved what was essentially a zero infection rate across the state by September of 2021. In this post, I present what was happening at the Federal level in India during the time that UP was eradicating COVID.
 India’s Federal COVID Response
 Although I will denounce some aspects of corruption by the Federal Health Agencies in India by the end of this post, I have to give the “Indian Feds” credit for having started out on the right foot in early 2020. They, like UP, started with a goal of trying to protect the country’s population by investigating the use of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) in prevention and treatment for COVID.
 Already by March of 2020, the Indian Council for Medical Research (ICMR), an advisory of leading medical centers and central government hospitals, issued a recommendation for the use of HCQ in prevention for Health Care Workers (HCW) across the country. Further, the prestigious All India Institute of Medical Science (AIIMS) even suggested its use in treatment while also indicating that ivermectin could be used as an alternative! Check it out:
 Can Ivermectin be used for COVID patients?
 Ivermectin has been found to be a potent inhibitor of SARS CoV2 replication in vitro, but the doses required to achieve this effect in vivo far exceeds the usual dose. It is currently not recommended in the national guidelines  but can be used in patients in whom HCQ is contraindicated ( September 2020. AIIMSeICUsFAQs01SEP.pdf)
 What isn’t funny is how they arrived at that suggestion despite including one of the more famous disinformation narratives against ivermectin that circled the globe, you know the one about how effective concentrations would be unobtainable in humans. Paul Marik, Andrew Hill, and I presented data from Caly and Wagstaff of Monash University which debunked that narrative in January 2021 to the NIH treatment Guidelines Panel. Apparently they never saw fit to share it with the world.
 Contrast India’s bold moves above with what the United States of Pharma (USOP) was doing in response to COVID. The US Feds very quickly started pulling some of their first blatantly corrupt moves, likely sparked by the fear of the consequences of the world’s second most populated country deciding to deploy, gasp .. generic, repurposed drugs to combat the pandemic.
 In retrospect, Fauci’s actions are horrifying (again, he effectively controls the FDA, CDC, and NIH). One week later, on March 28, 2020, the CDC issued a Health Advisory warning of the dangers of HCQ use (they employed this identical disinformation tactic 18 months later against ivermectin). Then two weeks after that, the CDC went further and removed their prior “soft” recommendation for HCQ with the statement: “ there are no drugs or other therapeutics approved by the US Food and Drug Administration to prevent or treat COVID-19 .”
 It should go without saying to readers of my Substack that the PFDA (remember, the P is not a typo) does not guide the practice of medicine, a sleight of hand trick the CDC uses often. There is no requirement for the PFDA to “approve” any medicine for use in COVID that has already been granted PFDA approval previously for another condition. Well, at least that was the rule until HCQ and IVM came along threatening Big Pharma’s entire vaccine and therapeutics market for COVID. The bulletins above then influenced all the Medical Associations, Medical Boards, and Pharmacy Boards into scaring physicians and pharmacists across the land into stopping prescribing and/or filling two of the world’s safest medications. Fortunately, in the past months, many states of the USOP have fought back against Fauci’s Federal Health Agencies, so much so that 42 of 50 states have either active, pending, or passed legislation protecting physicians and pharmacists to talk about and/or prescribe and fill repurposed medications to treat COVID.
 The USOP did not stop there. The CDC’s criminal actions were followed a week later by the PFDA posting this bulletin cautioning against use “ outside of the hospital setting.” This move was historic to me personally, because it was the first time in the pandemic that I was shocked by the supposed idiocy of U.S. federal therapeutics policy. I thought, “man are they being stupid, anyone knows that if an antiviral is going to work, it has to be given within the first days of illness. Why would they restrict it to the hospital’s hyper-inflammatory phase, where live virus is present in so few?”
 It didn’t take me too long to realize that their policies were, rather than “stupid,” instead wickedly malevolent in clearing the new, global marketplace for their wares. It was the direct cause of the ensuing humanitarian catastrophe. We now know that had they gone “all in” on early treatment like UP, many hundreds of thousands of lives would have been saved in the U.S. alone and it would have prevented them from pulling off the devastatingly lethal vaccine fraud.
 These nonsensical and corrupt federal policy pronouncements were then followed by what I would learn in time to be the standard pattern of Big Pharma Disinformation campaigns. Major media articles and medical journal publications began to appear, cautioning and/or attacking decisions like India’s. Here is one in the Indian Journal of Medical Ethics. These “cautioning” types of articles, trying to dissuade the empirical use of safe, promising, repurposed drugs during a public health catastrophe, shocks me to this day. In my recent post on the fraudulent TOGETHER ivermectin trial , I gave similar examples in relation to ivermectin.
 In contrast to the USOP, the prestigious ICMR quickly conducted a trial of HCQ in prevention and found it reduced infection rates by up to 80%. They began exporting it to many countries around the world and were still recommending it in June of 2020. However, by July, the ICMR was starting to get cold feet, as detailed in this article , triggered when the WHO started publishing their fraudulent hospital trials on HCQ.
 The Delta Wave Hits
 The Delta wave starts to wreak havoc in India beginning February of 2021. The crisis leads television broadcasts and newspaper headlines across the world. So what did India’s Federal Agencies do in response to this historic crisis? They again did the right thing! On April 22nd, the Ministry of Health, the prestigious All India Institute of Medical Science (AIIMS) and Indian Council for Medical Research (ICMR) updated the national COVID-19 treatment protocol. The new protocol recommended Ivermectin and budesonide for all patients with a mild case of COVID.
 For the enemies of ivermectin (which are many), this was NOT good. Again, the world’s 2nd largest country recommending ivermectin to over a billion people? This absolutely freaked out the WHO as I will detail below (it should go without saying that the WHO is controlled by and effectively represents Big Pharma and Bill Gates).
 Get this, they even recommended it for 3-5 days!

 On April 22nd, the AIIMS issued their own guideline which included hydroxychloroquine as well, under the column “MAY DO”. Check it out:

 On April 29th, in a press conference, the Ministry of Health once again confirmed the new protocol. These updates were presented to the media on April 30, 2021 and can be viewed here .
 Now, this is where corruption via censorship and propaganda are kicked into high gear. The media simply refused to promulgate the news. Instead they continued to promote Remdesivir as an effective drug, and the few media outlets that even bothered to mention ivermectin referred to it as “the unproven medicine” or an “outdated treatment.” It's as if there were two different realities—in the local health systems, millions of patients were now receiving ivermectin yet few knew due to what was essentially a media blackout. When ivermectin does surface, it's mentioned as “outdated” or “inappropriate.”

 To any reader of my Substack, this behavior should be unsurprising. I mean, given the reality that the world’s 2nd largest country was now systematically deploying ivermectin against COVID, Pharma and BMGF had to do absolutely everything possible to suppress, distort and dismiss the idea that ivermectin was effective. Recall that, aside from hydroxychloroquine, never has a single generic repurposed drug threatened more financial interests (hundreds of billions of dollars given the sum of the markets for vaccines, Paxlovid, Molnupiravir, monoclonal antibodies, Remdesivir etc).
 Their first attempt to block this action came from a random branch of India’s federal health agencies (the Directorate General of Health Services - DGHS) when whatever captured officials they had in there posted a bulletin “not recommending ivermectin.” One problem: the DGHS has no authority to impact the Guideline!

 The DGHS caused confusion for sure as this move was amplified across lots of media, trying to create a narrative that India was reversing its decision. However, ivermectin did continue to stay on India’s guideline until Gates visited Modi in September 2021 (not making this up). After Gates visited, ivermectin was removed from the National Guideline. Hang on until the end of this admittedly long post.
 Next the WHO starts to take insane actions against ivermectin (remember that on March 31, 2021 they had already updated their recommendation to not recommend ivermectin despite dozens of trials showing massive mortality benefits).
 Then, on May 8th, the WHO’s Chief Scientist Soumya Swaminathan (an Indian for chrissakes) tweeted the WHO’s absolutely idiotic “Home Care Bundle." See below. Drink fluid, take tylenol, monitor pulse ox. No treatment. Just like the NIH.

 2 days later, she goes after ivermectin even harder in one of history’s most criminal actions. Obeying what was definitely an order from above (I would guess it came from BMGF who is the 2nd largest funder of the WHO after the U.S), she stupidly cites Merck’s “opinion” in her tweet to the world reminding them that the WHO doesn’t recommend ivermectin outside a clinical trial. She literally cited a pharmaceutical company’s public relations campaign against a competing drug (remember, although Merck invented ivermectin, they can’t make money off of it anymore as it is no longer patent protected). Merck’s shiny new pill Molnupiravir is thus a direct competitor of ivermectin.

 The statement she cited by Merck (below) had been posted on the company’s website about 8 weeks after my Senate Testimony on Feb 4, 2021.

 The three statements above were outrageously fraudulent. No study paper or analysis of data was posted to support the statements and no authors were listed. Instead the statements were simply attributed to the conclusions of “company scientists." The reality is that this was 100% written by their Public Relations department. Hey Merck, why don’t you try to prove me wrong in court? The FLCCC doesn’t have the money you do, but I promise you we now know several very wealthy people who would love to back us in that fight.
 The FLCCC’s review paper, which I was the first author of, had already passed peer review and been publicly posted (and presented to the NIH) at that time of Merck’s PR move. It included dozens of trials and reports of health programs using ivermectin with dramatic results. Yet it was the unsubstantiated Merck bulletin that was blasted across the world via headlines in major newspapers, TV, and radio. It was terrifying to me at the time because I did not fully understand yet that it was a complete Disinformation tactic, plain and simple. One of many tactics that Pharma has been perfecting for decades and are really, really good at. NPR reached out to them to discuss their statements further and they “declined to comment.” Shocker.

 So, the Chief Scientist of the WHO cited a bulletin of pure propaganda by a pharmaceutical company to complete her assigned task of recommending against ivermectin in the midst of her country’s crisis. You cannot make this stuff up.
 However, she soon found herself in deep doo-doo. An organization called the Indian Bar Association quickly filed criminal charges against her for this tweet, accusing her of a crime which apparently included the possibility of a death penalty. She very quickly deleted her tweet.

 Further evidence of the discomfort of WHO officials when asked about ivermectin can be found in this interview by independent journalist Ivory Hecker who was investigating ivermectin suppression in the U.S months ago (see mark 12:10-15:00). Recall that Ivory was formerly employed by a Texas Fox News Affiliate until her widely covered live, on-air resignation protesting censorship of ivermectin and other topics at Fox. Anyway, watch the WHO official literally squirm trying to dismiss the idea ivermectin works or that the WHO knows this. At mark 14:35, Ivory asks the WHO official , “What do you think is working in India right now?” His deflection of an answer is quite telling.
 Now check out this email from a surgeon and owner of a hospital in India who asked to remain anonymous. I think it says it all:

 When I asked him if he would come on our FLCCC webinar to discuss the situation and response in India, this is what he wrote back:

 Craig Kelly, an Australian politician, who, like Senator Ron Johnson, led a very public and much-vilified attempt to challenge Australia’s criminal ignoring of early treatment. He was well aware of numerous other successful early ivermectin treatment programs like in Paraguay , Argentina ( here , here and here ), Brazil , Mexico , Phillipines , and Peru among others.
 In his tweet below, he humorously asked if Australia could borrow UP’s Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath to replace their “hopelessly incompetent State Premiers.” The Chief Ministers Office replied to him:

 So, clearly the CM’s office was validating that they were using ivermectin. However, do you remember that wickedly detailed, comprehensive 132 page report on UP’s TTT program that I introduced in Part 1 of this post ? The one whose lead author was a Professor at one of the top Universities in India? That report only mentioned ivermectin once “a s a protocol medication they monitor the supply of .” Well, in October of 2021, right after releasing it, he became active on Twitter, first detailing the critical aspects of the report. Notice how tightly he sticks to the “orders” he (and the rest of India’s media) were following which was to always say the words “medicine kit” instead of “ivermectin”.

 His tweet was met with many comments attacking his report, to which he replied with the below thread.

 Note how he claims the report “does not validate ivermectin.” Really? Hard to validate when the report barely mentions ivermectin or treatment (it does mention “immunity boosting kits” though. Whatever. Then he opines “what is surprising is that the situation was brought under control so quickly” (just like the surgeon predicted above). Agrawal is literally crediting the success almost solely to testing and contact tracing. Certainly he can’t attribute the success to the mass distribution of ivermectin in treatment to all active cases plus to their household members and close contacts for post-exposure prevention. I mean that would be absurd conjecture Professor Agrawal.
 Then he claims that “the report explains how that happened.” Just like the WHO’s report, his report attributes the TTT’s shocking success to anything and everything but… treatment with ivermectin. Again, the word ivermectin appears once in the 132 page report. Not subtle. This nonsense has been absolutely typical for “captured” health care leaders from both the Ivory Towers and the tops of national and international health agencies and societies. Why was there literally no major health care leader with just an ounce of integrity and two ounces of courage to blow the whistle on this fraud?
 Now, let’s get back to the Federal level. When ivermectin was placed on India’s national treatment guideline, other states besides UP were already using it aggressively like Bihar (although not in as organized or sophisticated a way as UP). States such as:
 Odisha :
 " Earlier, at least 20 to 25 HCWs were getting infected with the virus daily . After the workers started taking Ivermectin, the number of infection has come down to one or two per day," Dr Batmanabane said.
 Uttarakhand

 Goa

 However, during Delta, after ivermectin was included on India’s national treatment guideline and, as attested to by the surgeon above, many doctors across the country were using it while others derided and dismissed it. The controversy was strong, solely created by the relentless media and medical journal propaganda and censorship against the drug. Many experienced and highly intelligent doctors were fooled into thinking it was ineffective and were also unforgivably arrogant about it. This includes many of my formerly respected colleagues. But the doctors that knew it worked were being beaten back oftentimes by the high-level academics in the cities, a pattern and dynamic which was seen in many countries including Peru where the big city doctors in Lima refused to use it (and got absolutely hammered) while the more rural areas used it widely. In the U.S it was essentially the private practice physicians doing all the effective early treatment while what I call “the system physicians” were unknowingly letting people die for lack of treatment.
 I saved this email to me from an Indian follower of the FLCCC:
  “Unfortunately, the WHO Recommendation and the JAMA study have done more harm than good. We doctors who believe in ivermectin have been using it even today but the ones who were a little skeptical, might have stopped thanks to the misleading information lately.
 There are absolutely no public information initiatives on ivermectin.  I have a voice but not loud enough to reach everyone ( I hear ya sister ).
 The kind of popularity Remdesivir has got**.. i wish ivermectin did and we would have been at a different place altogether.
 (to demonstrate just how effective the media propaganda and censorship was, note that Remdesivir was twice as popular as ivermectin on google searches in India.
 Anyway, during Delta almost every state in India was broadly using ivermectin.
 Except for two.
 Tamil Nadu and Kerala.
 This is where it gets really, really interesting. Let’s start with what happened in Tamil Nadu.

 Their Chief Minister’s name is MK Stalin (not making this up). Stalin removed ivermectin, but did keep Vitamin C, Zinc, Budesonide, Ranitidine, Doxycycline. Let’s see what happened shall we?

 This decision did not start out well for them. Look out how fast the ivermectin recommending states were decreasing positivity rates, cases and deaths in the first 30 days of the Delta Wave. Tamil Nadu didn’t make a dent in the wave.

 Apparently they noticed this too. And what they did next was pretty incredible. They went all in on an early treatment approach with an anti-viral herb concoction called Kabasura Kudineer comprising ginger, pippali, clove, cirukancori root, mulli root, kadukkai, ajwain and many other herbs. An Indian study in June of 2020 found it effective and you can find lots of news reports about its use in Tamil Nadu from even before that time. Remember, there is no disease that can’t be treated. Early treatment works .
 Dozens of natural and repurposed pharmaceutical compounds have now been found effective as anti-virals. Meanwhile the USOP uses only Paxlovid, an absurdly over-priced and highly complex medicine with 125 different medication interactions across 25 different classes of medicine . It even comes with this thing I have never seen in my COVID career, a “rebound phenomenon,” particularly common in U.S health care leaders and presidents (about the only times I have laughed at Biden’s and Fauci’s behavior in the pandemic). But now we are apparently letting nurses prescribe the stuff. Not funny. See below from a nurse who wrote to me yesterday. USOP baby:

 Note that I have not validated the above, but it appears legit and also unsurprising.
 Anyway, on May 12, Tamil Nadu gets into the “distribution of medicine kits” game. Curiously, the headline actually lists the contents of the kit. Thats weird.

 And guess what happens? The “drop” in cases and deaths starts soon after. Boom. Early treatment my friends. Go Stalin (ouch).
 @WHO at all.\nThey treat EARLY with:\nNatural medicine: Kabasura Kudineer\n\n\nVit C, Zinc and Budesonide, plus Ranitidine, Doxycycline if worsen. \n cms.tn.gov.in/sites/default/… ","username":"jjchamie","name":"J Chamie","profile_image_url":"","date":"Sun Jul 04 19:26:18 +0000 2021","photos":[{"img_url":"https://pbs.substack.com/media/E5ebeIhWQAcB0A5.jpg","link_url":"https://t.co/qQVMdQLbwr","alt_text":null}],"quoted_tweet":{"full_text":"Two pilot studies conducted in May and June 2020 by the National Institute of Siddha, Tambaram, here and SRM Medical College Hospital and Research Centre revealed that 99% COVID-19 cases turned negative within five days.\nhttps://t.co/7tbkRC7uYQ","username":"jjchamie","name":"J Chamie"},"reply_count":0,"retweet_count":14,"like_count":41,"impression_count":0,"expanded_url":{},"video_url":null,"video_preview_media_key":null,"belowTheFold":true}" data-component-name="Twitter2ToDOM">
 Now Kerala’s performance you already know about from Part 2 of my UP series but lets check in to see how they have done after banishing ivermectin and going at COVID hard with Remdesivir and the jabs. Recall that prior to Delta they had some of the lowest death rates in the country. In the chart below, the other grey lines represent the death rates per 100,000 of 29 other Indian states. Kerala has been the worst performing state by far ever since.

 Bill Gates Comes to Town and Ivermectin Leaves
 By the end of September 2021, most of India was out of the woods due to abundant natural immunity and widespread use of ivermectin. However, India could not afford to be shunned from the money and support the WHO (and its greatest contributor, Bill Gates and his Foundation) can provide them.
 Well, as it happens, in late September 2021 good ole’ Billy Gates comes to visit India and meets with Prime Minister Modi.
 By all appearances what happened is that India caved in to pressure to remove Ivermectin from the guidelines on September 23rd in a quid pro quo deal. PM Modi agreed to remove Ivermectin in exchange for Gates providing WHO support and resources for the the “Ayushman Bharat Digitial Mission,” a program to provide healthcare digital ID numbers to all Indian Citizens (yeah that sounds like a program which will benefit us all). This was announced on September 28, just 5 days later. Clown World.

 Modi is quoted on Twitter thanking Gates, and then the article adds this doozy:
 "Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi will inaugurate CIPET: Institute of Petrochemicals Technology, Jaipur and also lay the foundation stone of four new medical colleges in Banswara, Sirohi, Hanumangarh & Dausa districts of Rajasthan on 30th September 2021 at 11 AM via video-conferencing."
 Yeah, that’s exactly what the world needs, four medical schools funded by Bill Gates.
 It is my belief that the war on ivermectin is over. Well, if not over, at a stalemate. All the doctors across the world using it to treat COVID will continue (unless we lose our medical licenses to do so like my friend Meryl Nass is being threatened with (not if we have anything to do with it - Paul Marik and I are serving as her expert witnesses). The rest of the system docs will continue to dismiss it as a horse dewormer and prescribe Paxlovid. Good times.

 I just want to say how much I appreciate all the subscribers to my substack, and especially the paid ones! Your support is so greatly appreciated.
 Subscribe now
 P.S. I opened a tele-health clinic providing care not only in the prevention and treatment of acute COVID, but with a specialized focus on the study and treatment of both Long-Haul and Post-Vaccination injury syndromes. If anyone needs our help, feel free to visit our website at www.drpierrekory.com.
 P.P.S. I am getting professional help (hah!) to write a book about what I have personally witnessed and learned during Pharma’s historic Disinformation war on ivermectin.  Pre-order here for:

Summary: While Uttar Pradesh was "quietly" eradicating COVID, India adopted ivermectin nationally to combat the disastrous Delta wave. The impact of that decision is the world's 2nd biggest criminal secret.