Dr. McCullough Discusses ‘Winning the War Against Therapeutic Nihilism’

On October 2, Dr. Peter McCullough was a key speaker at the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons’ 78th Annual Meeting, where he shared the concerns he has of COVID-19 vaccines to those in attendance both in-person and online. Taking place in Downtown Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, the 3-day event welcomed Dr. McCullough as one of the last speakers as he discussed Winning the War Against Therapeutic Nihilism and the Rush to Replace Trusted Treatments with Untested Novel Therapies.

Something Isn’t Right 

Introducing himself as an internist, cardiologist, and trained epidemiologist, Dr. McCullough mentioned that he “stepped forward in COVID-19” because “something was going very wrong, very early” and he “wasn’t going to stand for it.” His hour-long speech highlighted the great gamble associated with vaccine development and several shortcuts that were taken.

Specific risk groups such as “pregnant women, women of childbearing potential, individuals who were Covid-recovered, and those with positive serologies,” Dr. McCullough said, were agreed to be excluded from participating in clinical trials by the FDA and all the Institutional Review Boards. Yet, for some reason, those groups were encouraged to take the vaccine once it was readily available. 

“They should have excluded those who were excluded from clinical trials … because they knew that vaccines weren’t going to work or cause excessive harm,” Dr. McCullough said. “Under no circumstances should a human being have ever taken one of these vaccines because they weren’t allowed in (a) clinical trial. Full stop.” 

Key Points Argued

Some other key points during McCullough’s speech: 

  • mRNA vaccines include spike proteins, which are being injected into the human body. “It is a deadly protein. By itself, it is a deadly protein. It’s the first time in human medicine where we are injecting vaccines and we are asking the human body to make a potentially lethal protein.”

  • As of Sept. 24, according to CDC database VAERS 15,937 vaccinated Americans have died, over 250,000 vaccinated Americans have gone to hospitals or had an office visit, and over 20,000 vaccinated Americans are permanently disabled which he described as “bigger than some major cancer groups.” Of those deaths among the vaccinated, 50% occur within 48 hours of the shot, 80% occur within a week and 86% have no other explanation for their death other than the vaccine. The government denies these claims.

  • The virus is figuring out how to thrive among the vaccinated. By now we should be seeing 3-12 different strains. Dr. McCullough said that the “Delta variant is here to stay until the vaccine changes.”

  • Vaccines have had no impact on the epidemic curve. What reduces mortality is expedited treatment and how we respond to the virus.

  • Hospitals don’t know who is vaccinated so where are these numbers coming from that are swirling in the news and on social media? If 23% of Americans who were hospitalized with COVID-19 had been vaccinated, then the narrative that 99% were among the vaccinated was made-up propaganda. It has never been 99%.

Dr. Peter McCullough was born in Buffalo, New York, and spent many of his adult years living in Texas and now resides in Dallas. He received his Bachelor of Science from Baylor University and earned his medical degree from the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center. Dr. McCullough completed his 3-year residency in internal medicine at the University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle. Dr. McCullough earned his master’s degree in Public Health from the University of Michigan. He then began a fellowship in cardiovascular diseases in Royal Oak, Michigan at Beaumont Hospital now the Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine.

Following his fellowship, Dr. McCullough practiced medicine at the Henry Ford Heart and Vascular Institute in Detroit and has served in many roles including Section Chief of Cardiology at the University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Medicine, and Truman Medical Centers; Consultant Cardiologist at the Beaumont Hospital; Chief, Division of Nutrition and Preventive Medicine Division of Cardiology; Chief Academic and Scientific Officer of the St. John Providence Health System, the largest health ministry in the nationwide Ascension Health System. He is in academic internal medicine and cardiovascular practice in Dallas, TX. 

With over 1,000 publications and 600 citations in the National Library of Medicine, Dr. McCullough has received recognition for his contributions to cardiorenal syndromes by receiving the International Vicenza Award for Critical Care Nephrology. He was also a recipient of the Simon Dack Award from the American College of Cardiology.

A Letter to the BBC

The BBC recently did a complete hit job on ivermectin—not surprising given the money circulating to ensure such events occur as planned.  Among the many inaccuracies the BBC proclaims up to a third of the ivermectin studies as probable frauds, yet they have no basis to make such a claim. In fact, the BBC’s critique in part rests on the work of a questionable group. One that while seemingly innocently muckraking, execute an agenda.  

The center of the BBC critique used to bash dozens of studies including a study favoring ivermectin in Egypt led by Elgazzar et al.  Yes, the public British broadcaster’s thrust against the drug is based on a questionable investigation into this study. One that led to the pulling of the preprint write-up and 24 hours with no consultation to the author—by no means a reasonable amount of time—then a bashing by a major newspaper. Smells like a setup. 

What follows is a letter from Dr. Tess Lawrie, Ph.D. director of the British Ivermectin Recommendation Development Group (BIRD) to Jack Goodman, a journalist from the BBC.

Dear Jack

Thank you for taking an interest in early treatment for Covid-19. Remarkably, you are the first BBC journalist to contact us in almost 20 months. In those 20 months, doctors around the world have been treating patients successfully with multi-drug protocols (of which ivermectin is one medicine used) – while the NHS guidance to the public has been to drink water, stay home and wait until their oxygen levels go below 92% or a number of other serious signs and symptoms develop. 

In such a health emergency, particularly one which has clear age stratification and obesity indicators, one might consider preventative and outpatient advice of paramount importance (perhaps recommended changes to diet or increased exercise or safe medicines with anti-viral properties) in order to take the number of hospitalisations downward and remove the pressure from the NHS.  But no such advice has been given. In respect of this vacuum, many doctors have sought answers on how to prevent and treat covid-19 and found them. There are real people all over the world who have been well served by their guidance and continue to be so – you should talk to some of them. 

If you sense some cynicism in this reply, you would be correct.  I have never experienced a situation where censorship has been applied to medical discussion and guidance. The government and media disdain for the mountain of evidence supporting early covid-19 treatment seems to be restricted to anything that is not a novel therapy. 

How did remdesivir at around $3000 a treatment get to be approved by the FDA, MHRA, etc on the back of one trial that had a marginally positive effect? It has since been shown to be ineffective and is not recommended by the WHO, yet it is in our British National Formulary for use in covid-19 and appears to be widely used in our hospital ITU’s despite growing concerns over its safety. 

Ivermectin, at 50 pence a tablet, now has 63 controlled studies, 45 of them peer-reviewed, 31 RCTs, 7 meta-analyses, and several published country case studies that overall, clearly support its use and show no evidence of harm, as well as many expert opinions and testimonials. Why is it not approved in this country, but it is in others? 

You may be surprised to hear that, in the UK, ivermectin is indicated to treat the most vulnerable people with covid-19 – those who are immunocompromised; this is not recommended for covid per se, but to prevent worms.  Surely the question to ask then is if ivermectin can be used among the most vulnerable, why do the authorities insist that it is a horse medicine and/or that it is dangerous for use in humans? 

Why does the UK have among the highest Covid-19 death rates in the world? At some point, the BBC should look at how Indian states (for example, Uttar Pradesh) managed to suppress Delta with 15% vax levels while UK cases remain stubbornly high, with 80+% vaxxed. Despite NICE stating that they would look at real world data for Covid-19, they have failed to do so.

We welcome open scientific discussion and trust that you intend to facilitate this as time is running out, particularly for the many in ITU’s around the country today without effective treatment. I hope the following answers will help to inform the BBC’s position and that you are able to give a more balanced view to this really important issue of early covid-19 treatment. 

Best wishes,

Tess

On 14/09/2021 16:47, Jack Goodman wrote:

>

Dear Dr Lawrie,

>

I’m working on a story for the BBC News website looking into the clinical studies supporting ivermectin as a Covid treatment. Independent scientists that have looked into the evidence say some of these studies are highly flawed or contain fabricated data. 

I am aware of a journalist and an epidemiologist in Australia who hold a very vocal position against ivermectin; however, most independent scientists who have looked at the evidence on ivermectin agree that the big picture supports its use for covid-19. 

Whether or not the Elgazzar study is discredited remains to be determined but it may well be.  We have rerun removing the disputed trial from the relevant analysis and have reported the findings here.

Whilst the quantitative result inevitably changes with the removal of the Elgazzar study, the mortality outcome remains clear, demonstrating an average reduction in deaths of 49% in favour of ivermectin. The effect on reducing covid-19 infections when used for covid prevention remains virtually unchanged.

It is important to remember that systematic reviews are just one type of evidence on ivermectin, which restricts studies to randomised control trials only. There is also a vast amount of real-world evidence from patient, doctors, and countries that are successfully using ivermectin. Please visit the www.worldivermectinday.org and also see the proceedings of the International Ivermectin for Covid Conference held in April for more information. 

In addition, the Together trial found no benefit from the drug and the Cochrane review said there was no evidence of benefit.  

The Together trial is one of many and will be added to our meta-analysis in due course. Trials are often flawed, and single trials are not as robust as systematic reviews, which are the best way to understand the effects of treatments because they consider all the relevant trials. In addition, particularly during a health emergency, it is important to consider all data, including observational and real-world data, which is what the British Ivermectin Recommendation Development meeting on 20th February 2021 was about. This meeting was conducted in accordance with the WHO Handbook for Guideline Development. As required, the evidence-to-decision document considered people’s preferences, acceptability, feasibility, equity, and cost of ivermectin used in the context of covid-19. 

The Together trial is a medium size, non-peer-reviewed study and adds to the bank of knowledge that suggests that given late and for only 3 days, ivermectin may have little effect on covid-19 hospitalisation rates. This is not too surprising, as this would be the case for most medicines.

Had the investigators followed a dosing regimen from well-documented expert protocols on early treatment, this study could have shown better results. A late-stage intervention will have less positive outcomes. Ivermectin is widely available in Brazil, but the researchers did not check to see if participants in the placebo group had access to it or were using it. This could have skewed the results against ivermectin. In addition, the authors state that their study was under-powered to detect a difference between the two groups. These potential flaws were pointed out to them in the early stage by experts in the field. There are therefore many doctors who feel this study was designed to fail.

The Cochrane study has some concerning problems and I invite you to take this opportunity to investigate them. Out of 24 available RCT’s the authors chose only 4 to include in their mortality analysis, a small subset of those available. The Cochrane authors split these up further into two separate analyses. This dilutes their findings to the extent that meta-analysis was not possible in most instances, as there were no trials to pool. Instead of utilising all available evidence and presenting appropriate caveats around such wider evidence, they present an empty review with bulk but little analysis. We have written a letter to the BMJ regarding the limitations of their approach. You can find the preprint here.

>

As someone who has remained a promoter of ivermectin, have such issues with the evidence base weakened your belief in ivermectin?

I am not a promoter of ivermectin – I am a mother, medical doctor, and scientist trying to help families survive covid-19. The only issues with the evidence base are the relentless efforts to undermine it. There are over 100 scientific papers on the use of human ivermectin that are relevant to covid-19. The majority suggest benefit, none show harm. I do not have a belief; I have knowledge that I would like to share. 

>  

>

You said on a panel that: “Ivermectin works. There’s nothing that will persuade me.” Do you stand by that statement?   

Yes. We are beyond the point of whether ivermectin works, with ivermectin now being used widely by doctors around the world to treat covid-19 in combination with other effective medicines and supplements. Ivermectin is included in covid treatment protocols as evidenced at the recent International Covid Summit in Rome. Please refer your readers to www.earlycovidcare.org for expert guidance on how to treat covid. 

>  

In a Talk Radio interview, you implied that the Covid vaccine has led to many deaths.

>

“If you take a vaccine, like the tetanus vaccine, which has been around since 1968, there’s only, you know, 36 deaths reported again, you know, attributed it on the World Health Organization’s database, whereas there’s 67,000 deaths reported against the COVID vaccines in just a few months on the World Health Organization database, and on the UK database there are 1440. So, this is unprecedented, I would say in the history of any medicine, to have so many deaths reported in such a short time, and indeed, so many reports in such a short time against a medicine.”

>

Figures from vaccine monitoring sites refer to any deaths reported in people after they have been vaccinated, whether it had anything to do with the vaccine. It’s unsurprising that several vaccinated people died in the days and weeks after their jab from unrelated causes.  

>   Given this, do you stand by your statement, and do you believe the vaccine rollout should be paused?

I have been following pharmacovigilance data on the World Health Organisation’s Vigiaccess.org since the beginning of the year for both ivermectin, remdesivir (which is used in the UK despite there being little evidence that it works or is safe), and the covid-19 vaccines. Whilst very few reports of adverse drug reactions have been posted for ivermectin, a considerable number (2 million) have been posted for the covid-19 vaccines, including more than 10,000 deaths. This led me to look at the data reported to our UK Yellow Card system. The Yellow Card system is our early warning system for possible safety issues; clinical trials are not powered to do this. 

Of the Yellow Card system, Dr June Raine (CEO of the MHRA) has said previously in a Guardian article: “There is no need to prove that the medicine caused the adverse reaction, just the suspicion is good enough.” As of today, on the Yellow Card system, there are 357,956 reports of adverse reactions to the vaccines and 1,625 reported deaths in the UK. This is much higher than the number of reports that led to the cessation of the Swine Flu vaccine and needs to be urgently looked into by the MHRA. Why have a system designed to sound an alarm and then ignore it? Perhaps you should look into that.”

>

> We’ve spoken to an expert who has been critical of the quality of the meta-analysis you co-authored and the claims it followed the Cochrane method. They said you and the group have muddled up advocacy and the scientific process and didn’t examine your own conflicting interests. How do you respond? 

The authors of Bryant et al have over 120 Cochrane systematic reviews under our belt. I think you can safely say that we know what we are doing. The review team included three highly experienced systematic reviewers; two of them are guideline methodologists.  The meta-analysis was peer-reviewed and conducted according to PRISMA methods (the base of Cochrane reviews), using GRADE and WHO guidance. 

Our findings are robust to the exclusion of the questionable study by Elgazzar and others and are supported by an independent team from Queen Mary’s University in London .

Please explain what my conflicts of interest are? Does my Hippocratic Oath constitute a conflict of interest? Personally, I have more to lose than to gain. As a doctor, advocating for a safe and effective medicine in a pandemic is not a conflict of interest, it is being a good doctor. That I champion a medicine known to work in an environment hostile to its existence is my duty. I am the Director of an independent not for profit company with no paymasters to please. I have absolutely no commercial interest in any medicine nor pharmaceutical company. My aim is to save lives and alleviate suffering. 

In a pandemic context, the benefits of Ivermectin almost certainly outweigh any risks, given its outstanding safety profile, negligible base cost, and the existing large body of evidence showing that ivermectin provides benefit in a variety of important clinical outcomes.

In order for us to reflect your position in our story, we would need to have received your response by no later than 12pm on Thursday 16 September.

>

Best,

Jack

BOMBSHELL! 661 Maine VAERS deaths in 28 days exposes Problems in State’s Narrative

During courtroom legal testimony, TrialSite advisory committee member Dr. Peter McCullough reports that the adverse event death rate in the state of Maine indicates considerable cause for concern. An inordinate amount of deaths, 661 within 28 days after vaccination, suggests a distinct possible link, although, of course, this isn’t prima facie proof that the deaths are caused by the COVID-19 vaccines. The VAERS death rate is 7 times the rate of Maine’s average monthly Covid death rate. During the entire year of 2020, Maine reported 1,070 Covid deaths. The lawsuit centers on a call for injunctive relief bought by the Alliance Against Healthcare Mandates. This plaintiff seeks to stop the State of Maine’s emergency rule-making order mandating all healthcare workers to get the jab for COVID-19. On the plaintiff’s side was counsel Ron Jenkins while on the state was represented by Attorney General Thomas Knowlton. Apparently, the entire court proceeding is blacked out from mainstream media, which by itself is quite troubling.

The Lawsuit

Early in September, the Alliance Against Healthcare Mandates filed a lawsuit against the State of Maine seeking to block SARS-CoV-2 vaccine mandates targeting health care workers. The key legal claim centered on the lack of legislative input or public hearings supporting the mandates. The plaintiffs argue that severe staffing shortages and stress on first responders would ensure. The target deadline for all affected workers is October 29, 2021.

Dr. Peter McCullough: Expert Witness

Published on YouTube, Dr. McCullough’s court testimony occurred Friday, Oct. 8, for a court audience in Augusta, Maine. The testimony revealed that 661 Mainers died within 28 days of receiving a COVID-19 vaccination, which places those deaths within the CDC’s window of investigatory concern as significant events. Dr. McCullough cautions all that the nature and timing of the deaths is highly suspect and needs to be investigated.

On the Defensive

The State of Maine’s CDC Director, Dr. Nirav Shah, shared his point of view. First, it should be noted that this office only investigated 31 of the 661 deaths—that is, those deaths that involved Myocarditis or inflammation of the heart often triggered by viral infection. Second, Dr. Shah minimizes the 661 deaths by comparing this count to the 400 million doses administered nationwide. Of course, that’s really just a real cheap trick as the State of Main only has about 1.4 million. So, the fact that this educated professional even tried such a comparison as a means of deflection only raises suspicion even further.

Moreover, Shah attempted to persuade the judge that the actual number of COVID-19 vaccines exceeded all previous vaccines for the last three decades. Finally, his personal analysis of breakthrough cases and what’s actually happening out in the world are two very distinct realities.

The Deaths

The CDC director reported that the following death categories were not investigated whatsoever:

  • Heart Attacks (391)

  • Strokes (260)

  • Embolisms (216)

  • Low platelet counts (201) or others

Rather these often-overlapping diagnoses were given to the CDC purportedly to investigate. 

Call to Action—check out the video. Follow Dr. McCullough’s on the McCullough Report. See a Facebook site associated with the Alliance Against Healthcare Mandates.

Texas Governor Bans COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates: Texas on Course to Conflict with POTUS

A clash of federal and state law often leaves the former as victor over the latter as seen in the nation’s first brutal test of what those lines were from 1861 to 1865. Via executive order, Governor Greg Abbott now bans any mandated COVID-19 vaccination by any entity in Texas. The Republican Governor directly counters the presidential executive branch orders setting up what will more than likely become a series of legal conflicts across Texas.

The move by Abbott isn’t trivial when considering the size and influence of Texas. It is second in the nation as the most populated state with 30 million people and has the nation’s second-largest economy at nearly a $2 trillion gross domestic product (GDP). Many companies have been moving their corporate headquarters from California to Texas. Most recently Texas has become home to 49 Fortune 500 headquarters—now third behind California and New York.

According to the Governor’s Office, the new executive order bans any “entity in Texas” from compelling the mandate of any COVID-19 vaccine on a person who may be an employee or consumer “…who objects to such vaccination for any reason of personal conscience, based on a ...

Airline pilots, railway workers, air traffic controllers, police, firefighters say NO to vaccine

We are watching an incredible moment in human history as professionals all across the spectrum of societal job roles are saying, "NO!" to vaccine coercion and threats. Southwest Airlines has now cancelled nearly 2,000 flights over the last three days because of a coordinated pilots' "sickout" protest over the issue of vaccine mandates. Southwest Airlines CEO Gary Kelly is committing massive fraud against his own pilots, falsely claiming there is a, "federal government COVID-19 vaccination directive" that forces him to demand vaccines for all his pilots. This is utterly false. No such mandate exists for private sector employees. OSHA hasn't published any such rule. Kelly is simply bluffing along with Joe Biden, pretending there is a federal mandate that he knows isn't law. Not surprisingly, many of his company's pilots are far smarter than Kelly seems to realize. Pilots tend to be sharp people, and they aren't stupid enough to get injected with blood clotting spike protein injections when they already face heightened blood clot risks due to the time spent on the flight deck, in long-duration seated positions. That's why they're saying no to Kelly and walking away from their jobs, at least temporarily.

SICKOUTS now spreading to other sectors of the economy as informed Americans say NO to the spike protein death shots

It isn't just pilots that are resorting to this important form of civil protest, either: Firefighters, police officers, railway workers and many others are saying, essentially, "Let's go Brandon" and telling the vaccine zealots to shove it. Amtrack trains are now starting to be cancelled as their train crews are calling in sick as part of a coordinated "sickout" protest. The treasonous mainstream media is blacking out all such stories in the hope that the practice won't spread. They want the American public to be ignorant, isolated and terrified of covid so that they can be easily controlled and euthanized (via vaccine). Rumors are also circulating that American Airlines pilots and workers may be joining the sickout activities, and there's little question this practice will spread from sector to sector as informed Americans declare my body my choice -- get that deadly jab out of my sight! We are now entering the era of mass non-compliance. This is the only option remaining when a tyrannical, pharma-infested medical police state has taken away legitimate science, human rights and the rule of law: DO NOT COMPLY with their extermination agenda. Walk away from your job and find work somewhere else, since there are a huge number of small business employers who desperately need informed people and who won't require mass vaccinations.

Supply chain disruptions accelerate as globalists seek the total destruction of humanity

Meanwhile, store shelves are going bare in NYC, where pharmacies like Walgreens and CVS are being pictured with "barren" shelves, all due to the supply chain disruptions caused by covid lockdowns that target transportation logistics personnel. It's very clear that the powers that be are engineering a total collapse of human civilization. Those who are stupid enough to take the spike protein injections will be destroyed physiologically. Those who refuse the jabs will be censored and fired from their jobs (economic warfare). The collapsing supply lines will impact everyone, resulting in extreme food scarcity and energy scarcity over the coming winter. This is the plandemic, after all, and every stage of the collapse has been meticulously planned from the very start. Get full details in today's Situation Update podcast at Brighteon.com: Brighteon.com/7d33a2e5-bbe1-462f-9e82-f943761ebca0Find a new podcast each day at: https://www.brighteon.com/channels/hrreport

Argentinian Doctor Shares His Ivermectin Experience

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

  • Argentina has extensive medical experience with ivermectin. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, it was used to treat dengue fever, which is endemic in Argentina

  • Early in the pandemic, Dr. Hector Carvallo, a retired medical professor in Argentina, devised two ivermectin trials to assess the drug’s usefulness against SARS-CoV-2. His treatment protocols are used in five Argentinian provinces. In one province, the death rate was reduced to one-third in less than a month, in the middle of the outbreak

  • When used preventatively, ivermectin is administered in conjunction with carrageenan, which also has antiviral properties

  • When treating mild cases, ivermectin is administered with aspirin; in moderate cases with aspirin and corticosteroids, and in severe cases, ivermectin is given with enoxaparin, an anticoagulant drug

  • These drug combinations were selected based on what was known about other viruses that cause similar health effects as SARS-CoV-2, such as the rhabdovirus’ effect on neurology, the paramyxovirus, which causes hyperinflammation in the lungs, and the dengue virus, which overamplifies the immune system

In this interview, we continue the COVID-19 discussion with a medical expert from Argentina, Dr. Hector Carvallo, whose focus since early 2020 has been the prevention and treatment of COVID-19.

Carvallo graduated from medical school in 1981 — the same year AIDS emerged as a global pandemic. In the first two years, AIDS killed 2 million people. Since 1981, it has claimed the lives of 35 million. While officially retired for a couple of years, the 2020 COVID pandemic brought him out of retirement.

“My first fire baptism was with AIDS,” he says. “I have dedicated my professional time to teaching and assisting. I graduated as a professor in 1996, and worked as a professor for the School of Medicine in Buenos Aires, which is public. Later, I was an associate professor of internal medicine for two private schools of medicine until I retired a couple of years ago.”

Ivermectin Is a Potent Antiviral

Interestingly, Carvallo had experience with ivermectin as an antiviral before the COVID outbreak. Argentinian doctors were using it against dengue fever, which is endemic in Argentina. So, when SARS-CoV-2 emerged, they decided to take another look at the drug to see if it might be useful.

“We came across some studies that were being conducted in Australia at the Monash University by people like Dr. Kylie Wagstaff,” Carvallo says. “We supposed that it would be very useful because the virology in effect already proved that, and we decided — even before they published their first findings — to replicate what they were doing, but in vivo. That is, not in the laboratory but in human beings.”

In early April 2020, Carvallo and his team developed two trials submitted to the National Library of Medicine in the United States. One was for preexposure1 (prevention) and the other for treatment. In both cases, ivermectin was used as an adjunct to other compounds, as they didn’t believe it was a silver bullet by itself.

For preventive purposes, they used ivermectin together with carrageenan, a food emulsifier and thickener that has a long history of use in both food and medicine. According to Carvallo, carrageenan has antiviral effects too, so the ivermectin was used in combination with topical carrageenan, administered through the nose and mucus membranes of the mouth.

In the treatment trial, ivermectin was combined with aspirin for mild cases, aspirin and corticosteroids for moderately severe cases, and enoxaparin (an anticoagulant drug) for severe cases.

These drug combinations were selected based on what was known about other viruses that cause similar health effects as SARS-CoV-2, such as the rhabdovirus’ effect on neurology, the paramyxovirus, which causes hyperinflammation in the lungs, and the dengue virus, which overamplifies the immune system.

Early Treatment Is Crucial

Like so many other doctors, Carvallo knew right from the start that early treatment would be crucial and that telling patients to just wait it out at home until they couldn’t breathe would be a death sentence.

“We knew from the very first day we entered the school of medicine that the sooner you treat any illness, the more chances you will have to be successful in the treatment,” he says. “You have to treat quickly, and strongly. This is natural thinking. Nobody has to be a genius to know that. In this case, inexplicably, many doctors have been told to do nothing.

To keep the patients in their homes on their own with just a few pills of Tylenol — which we know it's good for nothing — until they cannot breathe properly. Then they have to be referred to the hospital. That is patient abandonment under any law in any country …

If you walk around a corner and you see your neighbor’s house on fire, you may call 911. You may play hero and enter the house and try to save them. You may cry out for help. The only thing you must not do is nothing.

I believe in any attempt to keep a mild patient, mild. What I cannot accept as a medical doctor — because it is against our oath — is to remain with arms folded until that person gets worse. That's criminal … There's only one reason for all this. The reason is summarized in one word, greed.”

Aspirin was chosen for its anticoagulant effects. Another option recommended by American doctors is NAC, an over-the-counter supplement that both prevents blood clots and breaks up existing ones. NAC also has other benefits that makes it useful against COVID-19. Argentina does not allow the sale of supplements without prescription, so no dietary supplements were used in these particular trials.

“That doesn't mean we say they are not good,” Carvallo says. “We simply adjusted ourselves to what was there. We believe in the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine. We believe in the effectiveness of azithromycin. Vitamin D, zinc, doxycycline. We believe in those compounds too. But we have not tried them.”

Situational Update in Argentina

So far, only five of the 24 provinces in Argentina have authorized these ivermectin-based protocols for prevention and early treatment, but at least that’s better than the U.S., where ivermectin is rejected outright. In many U.S. hospitals, doctors who dare prescribe it face being fired.

As you’d expect with something that actually works, those five provinces are indeed faring better in terms of infection rates, hospitalizations and deaths. In one province, the death rate was reduced to one-third in less than a month, in the middle of the outbreak, when no vaccines were available.

Argentina didn’t start rolling out their COVID shots until March 2021, and the vaccination campaign has been slow. Carvallo estimates no more than 40% of the population has received two doses so far.

He believes the slow vaccine uptake is partly due to logistical challenges, and partly due to safety concerns. “Many people have preferred to use alternative methods instead of vaccines,” he says. Argentina may still move to make the injections mandatory, though.

“You know what? Making an experiment mandatory and using the media to convince everybody to use it is not new,” Carvallo says. “It was done during the second World War. Josef Mengele and Joseph Goebbels did that.

One made any experiment he wanted on people that were hopeless and at the camps. The other one was a minister of propaganda who convinced everybody that everything was OK … That's what we are seeing. Let's forget about science — common sense has been disregarded.”

Carvallo himself ended up taking the Chinese COVID shot, as proof of vaccination was required for him to travel to Europe. In an effort to counter any potential side effects, he continues to take aspirin to prevent blood clots, and ivermectin. “I keep on using Ivermectin,” he says, “I've been using it for over a year.”

Recommended Dosing Schedule

In the U.S., ivermectin has been mocked and misrepresented as a veterinary drug. In reality, it’s been approved for human use for decades, and won the Nobel Prize for medicine in 1995, at which time it was considered a miracle drug.

“Even people from the CDC have said, ‘You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Why should you use Ivermectin?’” Carvallo says. “I would answer them, if they consider ivermectin is only for veterinary use, they are neither horses nor cows, they are asses. The fact is, we use ivermectin on a weekly basis for preexposure, that's for prevention. The dose is 0.2 mg per kilo [of bodyweight. To calculate pounds into kilos, divide your weight in pounds by 2.2].

We adjust the dose to the patient's weight. One of the worst comorbidities for somebody contracting the virus is obesity. You cannot give the same dose to a skinny person and to an obese or morbid obese person. So, we adjust for that.

We use it once a week. Now that Delta is appearing in South America, we are considering reducing it to three or four days between doses. Do you know why we use it on a weekly basis? Because ivermectin will work for 3.5 days. For the other three days, you will be exposed.

You may contract the virus, but even before the virus can replicate enough to pass from the incubation period to the invasion period, you will take ivermectin again. So, you won't know it exists. You won't even realize you have contracted the disease. Your immune system will have [encountered] the virus and will start creating immunity …

We keep on using that four months. We'll stop for a couple of months because ivermectin will accumulate in the fat tissue. After two months of not using it, we start again.”

Carvallo also points out that natural immunity is far stronger than artificial immunity created by the COVID shots. This is no surprise, because that’s how it’s always been with all other viruses. The key is to prevent the infection from getting a strong foothold. With early treatment, you’ll get through the infection just fine, and have robust and likely lifelong immunity.

Addressing Toxicity Concerns

As for the safety of ivermectin, studies in Africa have used doses that were 10 times higher than the 0.2 mg/kg recommended for COVID, without toxic effects. Hydroxychloroquine, on the other hand, has a far narrower safety margin. This is well-known, and was clearly used to discredit the drug. As explained by Carvallo:

“What they did with hydroxychloroquine in order to discredit it was easy. Hydroxychloroquine is also very useful against COVID. But the safety margin is narrow. What they did was to use three times the dose in order to cause toxicity. There were 200 studies in favor of hydroxychloroquine.

There was one study talking about the toxicity, and all the scientific community in the world latched on to that one. That's crazy. In the case of ivermectin, it was so wide a gap between safety and toxicity that they couldn't do that. So, they just disregarded it.”

Now, there are veterinary formulations of ivermectin. Do not use these, as they typically contain polyethylene glycol (PEG), which is toxic to humans. Ironically, the COVID shots actually contain PEG. Many are allergic to this substance, which is why anaphylaxis is such a common acute side effect of the jabs.

Why Are COVID Jabs Still Recommended?

As of September 24, 2021, the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) had received 15,937 reports of deaths following the COVID shot, 71,036 hospitalizations and more than 752,800 adverse events in total.2

Calculations by Steve Kirsch, executive director of the COVID-19 Early Treatment Fund, based on VAERS data suggests the actual death toll may be around 212,000.3 He estimates side effects and deaths are under-reported by a factor of 41 or more, so the total number of injuries is likely between 2 million and 5 million.

Even if we were to accept the official VAERS numbers, the death toll is astronomical. Under normal circumstances, a pandemic vaccine would be pulled after about 50 deaths. No explanation has ever been given for why the COVID shots are still being universally recommended after nearly 16,000 reported deaths.

What we’re living is really a classic imitation of George Orwell's book “1984.” Almost everything government and health officials say is the exact opposite of the truth. Right is left. Up is down. Black is white. For those who know the facts, it’s a surreal experience. Double standards have also become the norm. As noted by Carvallo:

“The vaccine is almost sacred. It's like a Bible. Whatever we say in favor of other treatments is a sin. Nobel Prize [winners] of medicine, like Luc Montagnier and Satoshi Omura, have been censored on the media. It's crazy.”

What’s more, we already have evidence showing the shots don’t work as advertised. They lose effectiveness very rapidly. The answer we’re given is booster shots. Israel is already talking about a fourth dose, and the injections have not even been out for a full year yet.

“If you give a medicine and don't get a positive result in a few days, you reconsider either your diagnosis or your treatment,” Carvallo says. “You don't insist on the same thing because it's insane to insist on the same thing trying to get different results.”

The reason we keep getting more variants is because the vaccine is “leaky.” It doesn’t prevent you from getting infected, so the virus starts to mutate to evade the vaccine-induced antibody. Carvallo agrees, adding that it’s equally insane that the shots are designed to produce antibodies against just one portion of the virus, the spike protein, rather than act against the pathogenesis of the virus.

According to projections, we could potentially see billions of people die or be permanently disabled from these experimental injections. How are we going to take care of them all? Who’s going to pay for their care?

When you recover from a natural infection, you have both humoral and cellular immunity, and even though humoral immunity (antibodies) will decrease within a few months, you still have latent cellular immunity that will spring into action when needed.

The COVID shots do not provide any cellular immunity, which is why they cannot achieve herd immunity, even if 100% of a population is injected. Carvallo also points out that the SARS-CoV-2 virus is now the weakest it’s ever been. The real enemy at this point is the propaganda that keeps fear alive.

Now’s the Time to Take Control of Your Health

Carvallo is one of those rare individuals who has been able to perform research others cannot at this time. He’s retired, so he has no funding or career to lose. He hopes that, eventually, more doctors will go back to thinking for themselves and return to their oath to do no harm, and to focus on what’s best for their patients rather than the bureaucracy currently dictating what they can and cannot do.

According to projections, we could potentially see billions of people die or be permanently disabled from these experimental injections. How are we going to take care of them all? Who’s going to pay for their care? Already, U.S. entitlement programs — Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid — are nearing bankruptcy.

According to David Martin, Ph.D.,4 pension programs and entitlement programs will all run out by 2028, and as they run out of money, the drug industry will collapse as well, as they are the primary beneficiaries of these programs. Medicare and Medicaid pay for the bulk of the drug dependency in America.

So, in just a few years’ time, we’ll be facing a convergence of collapses on multiple fronts, and at the same time, large portions of the population may be severely ill and wholly dependent on these systems for their survival.

Society also requires all sorts of infrastructure, and if large portions of society are crippled or dead, society will collapse from lack of qualified workers alone. So, the COVID shot mandates are clearly making an already precarious situation far worse, as the financial system would be collapsing anyway.

The best thing anyone can do right now to prepare for this convergence of collapses is to focus on your health. Make sure you’re as healthy as you can be. Be sure to optimize your vitamin D level, for example, and avoid toxins of all kinds. Getting used to growing some of your own food would also be a good idea, as would looking into ways to protect your retirement assets.

More Information

To learn more about ivermectin, you can download a free ebook created by Carvallo and his team. It contains not only their Argentinian studies but also other peer-reviewed scientific articles detailing the benefits of ivermectin in the fight against COVID-19. You can find the bilingual (English and Spanish) book, “Ivermectin in COVID-19: Prophylaxis and Treatment,” on iniciatherapeutics.com.

Palm Gardens Medical Center Florida Refuses Ivermectin for COVID-19 Patient in Medically Induced Coma

Yet another ivermectin lawsuit was launched, this time in South Florida, as a Ryan Drock seeks to compel a local hospital, Palm Gardens Medical Center, to treat his seriously ill 47-year-old wife Tamara Drock with the drug.  Hospitalized for severe COVID-19, the Florida resident was put in a medically induced coma and has depended on a ventilator for the past two weeks. The plaintiff hired the specialist law firm of Ralph Lorigo, who reports that even though the hospital protocol has failed the patient, “The hospital has refused to provide her Ivermectin.”

Mainstream Press Censors & Suppresses Material Information

While the mainstream press, in this case, NBC Miami, the mainstream press reports that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has warned against taking the drug used for animals to treat COVID-19. The plaintiff is asking for the human variety, approved the FDA with a stellar safety record. In fact, as TrialSite reported today, Ivermectin is just one of three antivirals listed on the National Institutes of Health (NIH) antiviral drugs either approved or under consideration targeting COVID-19. Under no circumstances would the drug be listed here if it didn’t...