Archive for the ‘Activism’ Category

AMA & Wisconsin Medical Society File Brief Against A Court Ordered Treatment of Ivermectin for COVID Reminding Us There is a Medical Cabal

https://www.ama-assn.org/press-center/press-releases/ama-wismed-oppose-ivermectin-court-ordered-treatment-covid

MADISON, Wis. — In a case before the Wisconsin Supreme Court that seeks to force physicians to provide substandard care, the American Medical Association (AMA) and Wisconsin Medical Society (WisMed) today filed an amicus brief (PDF) arguing against ivermectin as a court ordered intervention for COVID-19 as the drug has not proven effective against the disease.

The amicus brief in Gahl v. Aurora Health notes that ivermectin is not within the standard of care for the treatment of COVID-19 and warned against the court compelling the use of a drug that medical consensus finds is unsupported by available medical evidence and discouraged by federal agencies and health authorities.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control & Prevention and the Food & Drug Administration have issued advisories indicating that ivermectin is not authorized or approved for the prevention or treatment of COVID-19. While the National Institutes of Health, World Health Organization, and Merck—the manufacturer of ivermectin—all state there is insufficient evidence to support the use of ivermectin to treat COVID-19.

The AMA and WisMed stated in the brief:

“The overwhelming majority of studies investigating ivermectin have not found it to be an effective COVID-19 treatment. The few dissenting studies that exist have ‘substantially evaporated under close scrutiny’ and even ivermectin’s manufacturer ‘do[es] not believe that the data available support the safety and efficacy of ivermectin for preventing or treating COVID-19. Thus, the consensus view of reasonable medical providers is that, apart from clinical trials, ivermectin should not be administered to treat COVID-19.”

Patients are encouraged to talk to their physicians about therapies authorized or approved for the treatment of COVID-19. These important conversations have been greatly complicated by misinformation about ivermectin and COVID-19. To provide patients with competent treatment, the AMA and WisMed urged the court to acknowledge the standard of care for the treatment of COVID-19 does not require physicians to administer ivermectin.

Spurred by a mission to promote the art and science of medicine and the betterment of public health, the AMA continues to work in the courts to support evidence-based measures that reduce the risk of infection, hospitalization, and death from COVID-19 and ensure the health and safety of our nation’s workforces, families, and communities.

_______________

**Comment**

Similarly to treatment for Lyme/MSIDS, the Wisconsin State Medical Board and the AMA, which is run by a powerful private, nonprofit mob that exerts its influence through lobbying to censor and punish doctors who don’t toe the official party line in a “medical consensus,” are pushing back against COVID treatments that work.  How do I know ivermectin works?

Ivermectin has beat out NINE other medications – including the golden calf (Paxlovid) of the FDA.

Similarly to Lyme/MSIDS treatments that work, mainstream medicine simply ignores research that doesn’t come from supposed “medical consensus” – outliers need not apply.  This perfectly demonstrates that a Cabal is literally controlling medicine, and you are either in the group or you are not.  If you are in the group and regurgitate the narrative, you are fine.  If you disagree with the”consensus” you are ostracized, censored, bullied, persecuted, and unable to get your work published in journals.  This is reality.

It’s also imperative to understand that the CDC and the FDA are completely corrupt organizations that monopolize medicine.

Anything that competes with their vested interests is brutally attacked.

Our government agencies have vested interests in “vaccines” and own patents on over 50, as well as tests, and treatments.  This conflict of interest means business is more important than public health.  

For more:

I could literally go on to infinity with this…..

Category:

Activism, Treatment, vaccines, Viruses

Calcified Placentas Full of Spike Protein & Antibodies From Vaxxed Moms – Inflammation in ‘Every Organ & Tissue’ & Cardiologist Warns About “Vaccine” Shedding

https://rumble.com/v1y60t0-dr.-ryan-cole-says-obgyns-are-sending-him-placentas-from-vaxxed-mothers-to-.html  Video Here (Approx. 5 Min)

Dr. Ryan Cole Says OB/GYN’s Are Sending Him Placentas From Vaxxed Mothers to Examine

“These are placentas coming from Obstetric colleagues around the country. There placentas are the wrong size for the gestational age. These placentas are calcified. These placentas have spike protein in them.” ~ Dr. Ryan Cole

________________

https://www.theepochtimes.com/dr-tess-lawrie-covid-19-vaccines-cause-inflammation-in-every-organ-and-tissue-of-the-body

Dr. Tess Lawrie: COVID-19 Vaccines Cause Inflammation in ‘Every Organ and Tissue of the Body

JAN JEKIELEK

“There’s a loophole that they’ve slipped through in the regulatory process, because most drugs require pharmacokinetic studies … And that has not been done with the COVID-19 vaccines,” says Dr. Tess Lawrie, co-founder of the World Council for Health.

Pharmacokinetics is the study of how a drug behaves in a patient’s body, how it distributes, and how long it takes to be cleared from the body.

“Because they’ve been called vaccines … all these manufacturers have been required to do is to show that the product they inject gives an immune reaction, gets an immune response. They have not been required to show how it distributes around the body,” says Lawrie.

Laurie states that myocarditis is just the tip of the iceberg and that inflammation is occurring systemically in every organ and tissue of the body and that the shots must be halted immediately.

_______________

https://rumble.com/v1ytqys-cardiologist-warns-covid-vaccinated-people-are-a-health-threat-to-the-lives.html  Video Here (Approx. 3 Min)

Cardiologist Warns: Covid ‘Vaccinated’ People Are a Health Threat to the lives of the Unvaccinated

December 4, 2022
  • In the most comprehensive paper on shedding thus far, former Inserm researcher Dr. Helene Banoun has published the basis for which there is great likelihood that mRNA either on lipid nanoparticles or within exosomes is circulatory in blood and is secreted in every body secretion that would naturally expect to contain particles of this size.[iii]
  • Fertig et al, have shown mRNA is circulatory in blood for at least two weeks with no reduction in concentration out to that time point.[iv]
  • Hanna et al, have found mRNA within breast milk.[v]
  • Other research has found messenger mRNA in the lymph nodes of the “vaccinated” for months.
  • Less data exist on Spike protein shedding but it is not a far stretch to understand this is well within the realm of reality.
  • McCullough states that everything indicates you can get “vaccinated” by close contact with those who got the shots via kissing, sexual contact, and breast feeding.
  • No one knows how long you should wait for close contact to avoid shedding.  The messenger mRNA and spike protein have never been demonstrated to leave the body.
  • McCullough is recommending people wait at least 90 days for close contact with a “vaccinated” person.
  • Autopsies have shown the spike protein goes into the heart, brain, adrenal glands, and reproductive organs.

Source

Well, so much for those dangerous, selfish, “unvaccinated” people being a threat to others….

Category:

Activism, Heart Issues, Inflammation, vaccines, Viruses

USA Today Still Distributing Dangerously Misleading Article About Lockdown Efficacy & Safety and New Ivermectin Study Eerily Similar to the Old Flawed One

https://popularrationalism.substack.com/p/usa-today-still-distributing-dangerously

USA Today Still Distributing Dangerously Misleading Article About Lockdown Efficacy and Safety

The business of “Fact-Checking” has thankfully been fairly well debunked. Let USA Today know that they have left up a dangerously misleading article.

James Lyons-Weiler

Citing an array of so-called “Fact-Check” resources and some medical dude’s opinion as their sources on the monopoly on truth, USA Today published this embarrassing article in Feb 2022, full of bravado and certainty, claiming that a position paper published by economists was incorrect.

The paper in question was an evidence-based meta-analysis that examined published, peer-reviewed estimates of the impact of lockdowns on mortality from COVID-19, which came in at merely 0.2%.

The paper, “A Literature Review and Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Lockdowns on COVID-19 Mortality” was never represented by the authors or the publishing website as a peer-reviewed meta-analysis, but USA Today found some people on the internet who incorrectly described it as such, and used their error as a ding against the paper and its authors, which of course, is non-sequitur.

The paper also reported the massive economic costs of lockdowns, which is unquestionably correct and is now widely established.

But for USA Today, in their opinion, and in the opinion of their “experts”, the findings of the study were “missing context”, citing unidentified “public health and medical experts”.

“Public health and medical experts say the paper is flawed, in part due to its overly broad definition of ‘lockdown.’ Experts have also criticized the working paper’s emphasis on the immediate effect of lockdowns on COVID-19 deaths instead of disease transmission. Other peer-reviewed studies have found lockdowns prevent deaths.”

(See link for article)

_______________

**Comment**

USA Today has been previously criticized for falsely labeling truth as “misinformation.”  Spin doctors are gonna spin.

Weiler also tackles faulty PCR testing, and the failure to stop COVID in countries which adopted a “zero-COVID” policy and who are now suffering some of the highest rates of COVID, hospitalizations, and yes, even death.

Weiler states we should “remind USA Today that listing their ‘sources’ as a bunch of blog articles expressing someone’s opinion is woefully bad form for a professional media company as they were clearly ALL wrong.”

_______________

https://doyourownresearch.substack.com/p/activ-6-and-together-bear-strangely

ACTIV-6 And TOGETHER Trials Bear Strangely Similar Design Fingerprints

By Alexandros Marinos

Nov. 14, 2022

A while ago, I wrote an article enumerating ten questionable features of the TOGETHER trial on ivermectin, conducted in Brazil. What are the chances those same features would make an appearance in the ACTIV-6 trial on ivermectin, conducted by the NIH in the USA? Pretty good, apparently, because that is exactly what seems to be happening.

#1 – Randomization Anomalies

While the shape of the issue is different, the result is the same: the randomization of the trial is under question due to the fact that the treatment and control groups of the trial were drawn from different populations. As the ACTIV-6 trial participant I spoke to revealed, he was asked to pick which drug study he would be enrolled in. In contrast, the placebo group contained patients assigned to other drugs, most or all of whom chose to be randomized into that different drug. This is a systematic difference between the populations not accounted for in the trial.

Alexandros Marinos @alexandrosM
ACTIV-6 ivermectin paper out… looking at the randomization section… WHAT?! Participants could opt out of a drug if they didn’t FEEL it works. Or the site investigator could opt them out. “Here’s our ite menu, what drug would you like to randomize for?” This is not an RCT.
Image
11:09 PM ∙ Oct 21, 2022

#2 – Dosing

The ACTIV-6 trial takes the flawed dosing of the TOGETHER trial and makes it worse. This is one of those cases where a picture is worth 1000 words:

Not only does ACTIV-6 underdose those at highest risk the most, it also underdoses people with lower weights, effectively falsifying the dose given to patients.

(See link for article)

_______________

SUMMARY:

  • On top of randomization and dosing issues, ACTIV-6 and the TOGETHER trials did not exclude patients who had used ivermectin but allowed them to randomize into other drugs, which means patients allocated to fluvoxamine and fluoxetine may have also been taking ivermectin.
  • Placebo patients from all arms were commingled and utilized variable placebos, demonstrating the potential unblinding of the investigators and clinical staff.  The TOGETHER trial suffered this issue as well.
  • Despite the TOGETHER trial being heavily criticized for using ER visits as the endpoint, ACTIV-6 also used a composite secondary novel endpoint that intermingled ER visits, hospitalizations, and deaths.  COVID hospitalizations were not reported separately.
  • The trial has missing data such as information on patient populations.
  • Determination of dosages used is shrouded in mystery.
  • An author of the trial was also an author in the TOGETHER trial.
  • No information about the number of patients who actually adhered to the protocol and took their drugs as described was given.
  • Both trials failed to have an independent monitoring board, and the public-private partnership has numerous conflicted pharmaceutical companies in its management committee and membership.
  • To date, the data has not been made available to any researcher for any reason.
  • While the TOGETHER trial started out recruiting high-risk patients, this changed mid-trial towards low-risk patients. They then limited the number the could participate in the trial by adding new inclusion criterion, suggesting that Cytel, the company that “designed and led the TOGETHER trial”—using Clinical Trial optimization simulation software, was running interim data through simulations to figure out which kind of inclusion/exclusion criteria would give them the results they wanted.
  • Interestingly, this change made in TOGETHER was in May 2021, the exact date that ACTIV-6 trial protocol was first posed on clinical trials.gov.
  • The eery design defects and flawed decisions between both trials raise questions about whether the design of ACTIV-6 trial was informed by interim results of the TOGETHER trial, particularly since Dr. David Boulware is a shared author of both trials.
  • Transparency of data would alleviate suspicions but does not appear to be forthcoming.

These are the shenanigans in research now.  Question everything.  And Thank God for those willing to go through mounds of data with a fine-toothed comb, like this heroic mom with a scientific background who exposes junk COVID shot data.

FYI: Ivermectin and HCQ work:

For more:

Why research can not be trusted at face-value:

Category:

Activism, research, Treatment, Viruses

COVID Injection Roundtable Livestream Tomorrow (Dec. 7, 2022) Noon ET

Tomorrow, Sen. Ron Johnson will lead a roundtable discussion, COVID-19 Vaccines: What They Are, How They Work, and Possible Causes of Injuries, to shed light on the current state of knowledge surrounding the vaccine and the path forward. Medical experts and doctors who specialize in COVID-19 vaccine research and treatment will join Sen. Johnson at the roundtable. Watch here as Sen. Johnson talks more about this event.

Image

Click here for Sen. Johnson’s Rumble channel. The video will stay on the channel once the livestream has ended.

Sincerely,

Ron’s State Staff

________________

For more:

Category:

Activism, vaccines, Viruses

Opportunity to Help an Independent Researcher Publish His Work on Chronic Lyme Patients

https://www.gofundme.com/f/borrelia-research-microscopic-discovery  Go Here to Donate

Borrelia Research Microscopic Discover

Chronic Borrelia diseases in patients who show negative Lyme serology results in blood testing can be verified by microscopic detection of Borrelia spirochetes under the microscope from tissue samples, or blood smears or Cerebrospinal fluid.
My research uses DNA probes to directly image Borrelia spirochetes in blood, tissue, or CSF fluids which are provided to me by patients.
Publication of my research discoveries in Medical Journals is necessary to convince the medical community of the science behind my DNA probe based research.
Medical Journals charge between $3000 to $4000 for each manuscript which is cleared for publication.  These costs have prevented me from publishing my research discoveries of chronic Lyme disease case studies in which blood antibody studies are falsely negative and which are only validated by microscopic detection of Borrelia spirochetes in patient specimens.
I request your donations to help pay for the costs of publication of my Free to all Lyme disease research discoveries.
Thank you for your help
Alan B MacDonald MD

Category:

Activism, Lyme, research