Archive for the ‘Treatment’ Category

Science, Media, & Lies: Mary Beth Pfeiffer, Journalist and Lyme Patient

https://zerospin.substack.com/p/mary-beth-pfeiffer-investigative?utm_medium=web#details  Audio Here (Approx. 41 Min)

Mary Beth Pfeiffer, Investigative Journalist and Author

Dr. Steven Phillips interviews Mary Beth Pfeiffer.

If you’ve watched and listened in disbelief, bombarded by lie after lie, spun by journalists unworthy of the name—Then don’t miss this podcast.

Mary Beth Pfeiffer is an uncommon gem—One of the last true journalists out there—Honest, fearless, and completely unswayed by the political narratives that rule most media these days.

Her interview was like a breath of fresh air after being stuck inhaling fetid swamp gas for the past 2+ years.

Author of two highly praised books, Crazy in America: The Hidden Tragedy of Our Criminalized Mentally Ill, and Lyme: The First Epidemic of Climate Change, Mary Beth is an award-winning senior investigative journalist whose career spans more than forty years.

Throughout the pandemic, her journalistic focus has been squarely set on Covid, exposing the many lies that continue to endanger public welfare.

For another excellent article written by Dr. Phillips on Ivermectin go here:  https://zerospin.substack.com/p/ivermectin-upon-neutral-ground

A few points from the article on Ivermectin:

  • Ivermectin has profound anti-cancer effects without significant toxicity and when used in combination, it can turn chemotherapy-resistant cancers into chemotherapy-sensitive ones, as well as work synergistically with non-traditional anti-cancer agents, such as dichloroacetate. 
  • Ivermectin can also induce remyelination.
  • Ivermectin also promotes the regrowth of damaged peripheral nerves and functions as an immunomodulator.
  • “Ivermectin has continually proved to be astonishingly safe for human use.”
  • There are so many studies on ivermectin for COVID that several meta-analyses have been done showing ivermectin’s good activity against COVID
  • Health agencies in Argentina, India, Philippines, and many others, have all reported remarkable benefits to Covid patients treated with ivermectin.
  • And yet, somehow, NIH doesn’t recommend ivermectin for Covid:

    “There is insufficient evidence for the COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel (the Panel) to recommend either for or against the use of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19. Results from adequately powered, well-designed, and well-conducted clinical trials are needed to provide more specific, evidence-based guidance on the role of ivermectin in the treatment of COVID-19.”

  • And astoundingly, FDA tweeted: 

    You are not a horse. You are not a cow.  Seriously, ya’all. Stop it.  Using the drug ivermectin to treat or prevent COVID-19 can be dangerous and even lethal.  The FDA has not approved the drug for that purpose.

  • Phillips states calling ivermectin lethal is like stating drinking water or walking can be lethal, because they both can be.
  • He also points out the coincidence that after the tweet, a physician (Dr. McElyea) claimed ivermectin overdoses were jamming up hospital emergency rooms and every major media source pumped out the story.
  • Except it was all a hoax. Here’s what the hospital said:

    “Dr. McElyea has not worked at our Sallisaw location in over 2 months. NHS Sequoyah has not treated any patients due to complications related to taking ivermectin. This includes not treating any patients for ivermectin overdose.”

  • Another coincidence that within that same span: pharmacies stopped filling prescriptions for ivermectin and insurance companies stopped covering it.
  • A few weeks later coincidentally, Merck announced data about its new Covid drug molnupiravir.
    • Phillips remembers when 60 Minutes covered the Merck Vioxx debacle and the shocking events that came to light:

      “Merck made a “hit list” of doctors who criticized Vioxx, according to testimony in a Vioxx class action case in Australia. The list, emailed between Merck employees, contained doctors’ names with the labels “neutralise,” “neutralised” or “discredit” next to them.”

  • Dr. Phillips: “I’ve treated about 300 Covid patients to date and have used ivermectin as part of a multi-pronged approach since the first evidence came out for its efficacy. I consider all my patients to be at high risk given their underlying complex chronic health conditions and many of them have other traditional risks such as obesity, high blood pressure, and heart disease. None have died. I had one patient require a short hospitalization but she came to see me after 5 days into Covid, by which time the inflammatory phase of illness typically begins. She also has an immune system disorder. Like with any other infectious disease, early intervention is imperative.”
  • Phillips admits he’s seen ivermectin fail in the prophylactic setting and that he doesn’t rely upon it solely to treat COVID, but as part of a multi-pronged approach.

Category:

Activism, Treatment, Viruses

Disulfiram for Lyme Update #2

https://www.treatlyme.net/guide/antabuse-disulfiram-chronic-lyme-disease-treatment  Video and Article Here

Updated: 5/9/2022

About Disulfiram and Lyme Disease

By Dr. Marty Ross

For 30 percent of people with chronic Lyme disease, disulfiram is a game changer. This is a medicine historically used to treat people with alcoholism. Ground-breaking research from Dr. Rajadas’ Stanford University lab in 2016 showed disulfiram kills persister and growing forms of Lyme germs. Based on Rajada’s research, disulfiram is being repurposed as a Lyme antibiotic.

In alcoholism, disulfiram prevents the breakdown of a toxic alcohol by-product called acetaldehyde. As acetaldehyde builds up, it makes a person sick with severe abdominal pains and even headaches. In alcoholism, a person takes this medicine daily to prevent them from drinking out of fear it will cause severe illness if they drink alcohol.

In Lyme disease, we do not know the mechanism of how disulfiram works. But we do know in the laboratory that it kills Lyme persisters and is moderately effective at treating growing Lyme too. We also theorize that it breaks up biofilm slime layers that protect the germs.

(See link for article and 7 Min video)

____________________

**Comment**

Please read Dr. Ross’s article in full as well as watch the video.  He gives dosages as well as supportive supplements.

SUMMARY of effectiveness:

Dr. Liegner’s review of his patient’s charts shows:

  • 92.5 percent of people have varying degrees of improvements
  • 36.4 percent – enduring remission (clinically well for 6 months without anti-infectives)
  • 49.3 percent – fatigue as a side effect
  • 31.3 percent – psychiatric problems like anxiety, depression, hallucinations
  • 14.9 percent – neuropathy
  • 14.9 percent – liver enzyme elevation
  • 50 percent – unable to reach the target dose due to side effects (see dosing section below)

Dr. Ross states: Even if a person cannot reach the target dose, in my experience many get benefit by staying at a dose they can tolerate for at least 4 months.

Dr. Ross also states that Disulfiram doesn’t work for Bartonella but may help Babesia.

Please also see:

If you are a single person, please educate yourself about the psychiatric issues.  Never take this drug without a plan in place to have people checking in on you daily.  Take it from me – you can go mad as a hatter and be completely oblivious to your madness.  Been there, done that.  Neuropathy can also be a real side effect problem.

I’m still glad I tried it!

Category:

Babesia, Lyme, Treatment

Paxlovid Rebound Strikes Again

http://

The Kim Iversen Show

Aug. 1, 2022

Biden Pushes More Pills and Shots Despite Rebounds

There’s no data on Paxlovid on those who have had COVID shots.  Fauci also suffered a rebound case, which was worse than his first go around.

________________

https://www.medpagetoday.com/opinion/second-opinions

What’s Really Driving COVID ‘Rebound’ After Paxlovid?

— There’s only one way to find out

by Daniel A. Sweeney, MD, Cameron R. Wolfe, MBBS, MPH, and Andre C. Kalil, MD, MPH August 2, 2022

A photo of the packaging and blisterpack of Paxlovid.

In the early days of the pandemic there was an understandable rush to define and optimally treat COVID-19. Anecdotal evidence and the opinions of eminent scientists and non-scientists overwhelmed social and mainstream media platforms only to eventually be overruled by the results of careful, scientific analyses and well-designed clinical trials. Now, more than 2 years into the pandemic, we must return to the standard of careful and thorough analyses for all interventions and treatments.

The debate about “COVID-19 rebound” after nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (Paxlovid) treatment is one of these timely areas warranting further investigation. Continuing down the current path of uncertainty has consequences for how and by whom this antiviral should be used. However, by applying lessons learned from the early days of the pandemic — including acknowledging the importance of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) — we can avoid repeating the same mistakes. To do this, it is necessary to start by defining the question, identifying current knowledge gaps, and only then can one propose scientific solutions to bring a rapid resolution to the COVID-19 rebound controversy.  (See link for article)

_________________

**Comment**

Aside from the ever-mounting cases of Paxlovid rebound, Drs. Marik and Kory have been shouting from the rooftops about the dangers of taking Paxlovid. Said Dr. Kory in another recent Op-Ed:

“The problems with Paxlovid are no secret. FDA granted Pfizer emergency use authorization for the drug after a single trial with questionable results. The medicine has many contraindications, meaning it can’t be taken by someone who simultaneously would be taking certain anti-depressants, anti-seizure, anti-psychotic, cholesterol, or blood pressure medications. Furthermore, many Americans cannot take Paxlovid, given that nearly half of adults have cardiovascular disease.

“Consider the Food and Drug Administration’s recent decision allowing pharmacists to play doctor and prescribe Pfizer’s anti-viral treatment Paxlovid. No pharmacist could ever safely dispense a novel medicine with an unprecedented amount of drug interactions without in-depth knowledge of the severity of the patient’s medical problems or the critical necessity of each of their other medicines.

“Biden’s policy of a toxic jab in every arm and a pricey pill in every mouth needs an overhaul.”

Early treatment works. The FLCCC Protocols work. And hundreds of thousands are alive today to prove it.

But rather than take a cheap, effective, safe drug (ivermectin among others) – politicians continue to push expensive injections and medicines that not only don’t work, but are dangerous.

Category:

Treatment, Viruses

Public Health Vaccine & Treatment Fraud

https://popularrationalism.substack.com/p/how-fauci-and-grady-lowered-the-standards

How Fauci and Grady Degraded the Standards of Ethical Requirements for Clinical Research in the US Compared to the Rest of the World

In reading Nuremberg, The Belmont Report, and now the Helsinki Declaration, I can say that up to 2020, US had far lower ethical standards for human subjects research than WMA. Now? None.

James Lyons-Weiler
Excerpts:

Both WHO and the US HHS suffer from a form of ethical blindness when it comes to vaccine research. Foregoing long-term vaccine safety studies in favor of retrospective analysis of real-world data, these agencies fail to recognize that post-marketing (and post-EUA) studies are de facto uncontrolled, non-randomized prospective clinical trials conducted without proper consenting procedures.

If you’ve read the Nuremberg Code, the Belmont Report, and the Declaration of Helsinki, you’d know that protections are supposed to be in place not for some people undergoing some clinical studies, but instead are considered to be required to be in place for all people undergoing any clinical studies.

Where the US had departed (prior to 2020) from the rest of the countries that backed Helsinki (WMA) and participated in its updates included, according to Kimmelman et al. (2009) included:

  • Disclosure of conflict of interest
  • Public disclosure of study design
  • Benefit for populations in which research is conducted (beneficence)
  • Reporting of accurate results and publication of negative findings
  • Access to treatment after research has been conducted
  • Restriction of use of placebo in a control group where effective alternative treatment is available

The departure formally came when issues related to HIV clinical trials run in less wealthy countries seemed to depart from Helsinki standards. Rather than work to reconcile differences with Helsinki, US companies, and the US government came up with a different international standard called “Good clinical practice” – standards in place in the EU (codified as Directive 2001/20/EC), and the US (enforced as policy by NIH), all backed by Pharma.

The departure of the US and the EU from the countries that continue to abide by Helsinki serves to empower those running clinical trials at the expense of those individuals taking on the risk of new drugs and vaccines – both in the risk of poor efficacy and in the risk of potential safety issues.

Well, it turns out that Fauci was at the forefront of the war on ethical research, arguing against the requirement of the use of placebos in HIV drug trials in Africa.

Fauci’s insistence on no placebo arm in HIV drug trials in Africa is an example of bluster and posturing on morality to hide the negative consequences (harm) of the drug AZT. We’ve seen this bluster and posturing all along with COVID-19 vaccines, and Fauci’s denial of the efficacy of early treatment. He rolls over so many of the principles of medical research ethics – and ethics of care – those that were meant to be sacrosanct to protect the interests and well-being of individuals, as outlined in Nuremberg, Helsinki, and the Belmont Report.

Medical hubris has been the modus operandi of Fauci well before COVID-19.

It’s time to revisit why and how it came about that the pharmaceutical companies are able to write the rules by which they conduct clinical research.

(See link for article)

__________________

Please see Jeremy R. Hammond’s antidote to government and mainstream media’s disinformation:

__________________

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/fda-moderna-bypass-covid-vaccine-safety-standards-documents/

FDA Colluded With Moderna to Bypass COVID Vaccine Safety Standards, Documents Reveal

According to Alexandra Latypova, an ex-pharmaceutical industry executive, documents obtained from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services on Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine suggest the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and Moderna colluded to bypass regulatory and scientific standards used to ensure products are safe.

fda moderna covid vaccine safety

Excerpts:

After analyzing 699 pages of studies and test results “supposedly used by the FDA to clear Moderna’s mRNA platform-based mRNA-1273, or Spikevax,” Latypova told The Defender she believes U.S. health agencies are lying to the public on behalf of vaccine manufacturers.

“It is evident that the FDA and NIH [National Institutes of Health] colluded with Moderna to subvert the regulatory and scientific standards of drug safety testing,” Latypova said.

“They accepted fraudulent test designs, substitutions of test articles, glaring omissions and whitewashing of serious signs of health damage by the product, then lied to the public on behalf of the manufacturers.”

(See link for article)

_________________

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/biden-pharma-fda-officials-covid-booster-timeline

Biden, Pharma Pressured Top FDA Officials to Approve Booster Timeline, Emails Reveal

Judicial Watch today announced it received 112 pages from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration that show top officials being pressured by “companies and for that matter the administration, who try to impose timelines [sic] that make no sense.”

Excerpts:

The records were produced to Judicial Watch in response to a February Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Department of Health & Human Services (HHS) that was filed after HHS failed to respond to a Sept. 3, 2021, FOIA request for records of communication from the former director and deputy director of the FDA’s Office of Vaccines Research and Review, Dr. Marion Gruber and Dr. Philip Krause, respectively (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (No. 1:22-cv-00292)).

Drs. Gruber and Krause reportedly resigned during the White House’s push to approve the COVID-19 vaccine “booster shots.”

(See link for article)

The FOIA requests and lawsuits uncover a substantial amount of info on many COVID issues including a FBI inquiry, NIAD’s money and grants to EcoHealth Alliance and Wuhan for bat coronavirus research, Fauci emails citing ties between Wuhan and EcoHealth, Gates’ involvement with the Chinese government, HHS records showing a grant application for “gain of function” research on bat RNA, viruses, and genetic manipulation of SARSr-CoV WIV1 strain, HHS records showing the Pfizer lipid nanoparticles were found in the liver, adrenal glands, spleen, and ovaries of test animals 8-48 hours after injection, safety lapses at U.S. biosafety labs, and HHS records showing NIH officials tailored confidentiality forms to China’s terms.

_________________

HFDF ANNOUNCES LEGAL ACTIONS IN PARTNERSHIP WITH DAILYCLOUT

Leslie Manookian, HFDF President, has partnered with Dr. Naomi Wolf, DailyClout CEO, to hold the FDA accountable for its unscrupulous and unlawful approval of remdesivir for all patients, and COVID injections for young children.

Category:

Activism, Treatment, vaccines

COVID Risks May Be Heightened by History of Lyme Disease

https://www.news-medical.net/news/20220717/COVID-19-risks-may-be-heightened-by-history-of-Lyme-disease

COVID-19 risks may be heightened by history of Lyme disease

By Dr. Sanchari Sinha Dutta, Ph.D.
Jul 17 2022
Reviewed by Benedette Cuffari, M.Sc.

In a recent study published on the preprint server Research Square*, researchers report that individuals with a history of Borrelia infection, otherwise known as Lyme disease, caused by tick bites are at a higher risk of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

Study: Correlation between COVID-19 severity and previous exposure of patients to Borrelia spp. Image Credit: Kateryna Kon / Shutterstock.com

(See link for article)

__________________

SUMMARY:

  • Serological testing is not sufficient to differentiate between recent and past infections because antibodies persist in the blood – even after treatment.  What the article doesn’t say is that THIS, RIGHT HERE, is why current CDC 2-tiered testing should never be used solely to diagnose patients and why doctors need to be educated to make correct clinical judgments. 
  • What started the whole ball of wax is a case report of a patient infected with Lyme who was unsuccessfully treated with one round of antibiotics and who then got COVID.  The patient’s Lyme was suppressed (lower IgG test) due to the anti-COVID meds (umifenovir, hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and ceftriaxone).
  • The study included:
    • 31 severely ill & hospitalized patients who were either required non-invasive or invasive ventilation.
    • 28 COVID positive patients who had either mild or asymptomatic cases who were either treated at home or unaware of infection.
    • 28 seronegative controls
  • Serum samples were collected for COVID and Borrelia infections
    • A multi-antigen microblot-array utilizing 19 antigens revealed Lyme in all hospitalized COVID patients. 
    • Of the 28 mild or asymptomatic patients, 19 had Lyme, whereas in the control group of 28, 8 had Lyme.
    • Severe COVID patients also had significantly higher levels of antibodies targeting Anaplasma.
  • Regarding seropositivity for IgM antibodies (1st antibodies to show up after infection that stay for a short period of time):
    • 24 of the 31 hospitalized patients had Lyme antibodies
    • 13 of the 28 mild/asymptomatic patients had Lyme antibodies
    • 15 of the 28 in the control group had Lyme antibodies
  • Risk of COVID-related hospitalizations increased with each positive IgG (antibodies produced later on in infection and can remain after infection resolves. Having high IgG can be indicative of chronic Lyme), but was not observed for IgM.
  • Post-hoc analysis of selected antigens (Osp proteins, p41, and VlsE) was also
    included; multivariate analysis showed that odds of hospitalization increased with increasing levels of:
    • IgG antibodies targeting OspB, OspC B. burgdorferi sensu stricto, and OspC
      B. spielmanii
    • For IgM antibodies, the same association was observed for antibodies targeting OspC B. spielmanii and OspE
  • Interestingly, the authors state that they observed in many patients antibodies targeting different species (e.g. B. burgdorferi sensu stricto, and at the same time
    B. afzelii, and/or B. garinii) which may reflect cross-reactivity but also may result from coinfections with more than one species.
  • Previous exposure to Lyme and other tick-borne diseases can increase risk of severe COVID and this is the first observation that suggests links between Lyme disease and COVID-19 prognostics.
  • The authors state that screening of anti-Borrelia antibodies in COVID patients could identify high-risk patients and improve their management.
Journal reference:
  • Szewczyk-Dabrowska, A., Budziar, W., Harhala, M., et al. (2022). Correlation between COVID-19 severity and previous exposure of patients to Borrelia spp. Research Square. doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-1799732/v1.

_________________

**Comment**

This is a very interesting study but I come up with slightly different take-aways.  The first of which is – don’t let this article frighten you.  1) there are cheap, effective, safe treatments for COVID.  Far safer & cheaper than Lyme/MSIDS treatment! 2) it only makes logical sense that those with Lyme/MSIDS are sitting ducks for pretty much everything including highly contagious viruses (if that’s what this even is). Lyme/MSIDS patients already struggle with EBV, Herpes, cytomegalovirus, and much, much more.  You are not a hopeless, helpless victim. There are answers and actions you can take to protect yourself and treat yourself should you contract COVID.:

  • The case study states that the person’s Lyme was suppressed due to anti-COVID meds, yet list antibiotics (ceftriaxone & azithromycin) that are used often for Lyme – which would explain the suppression.  Suppression doesn’t mean the Lyme goes away, it just means it isn’t being picked up on the test – a common, well-known problem patients deal with on a daily basis.
  • HCQ was used, which is also used for Babesia, a coinfection they didn’t look for but is known to cause much more severe Lyme for a greater duration IF the patient has both infection concurrently.
  • And Umifenovir is a broad‐spectrum antiviral, which while it doesn’t treat Lyme directly, could assist by beating back other viruses like herpes, EBV, and others – all of which are big players in Lyme.  Treating Lyme/MSIDS is a balancing act.  Giving appropriate treatment to beat back infections and supporting your immune system to handle what’s there without freaking out is more in line than a “cure” of erradicating everything within you.  We are covered in germs/viruses and most are held in check by our immune system.  A tick/insect bite changes that balance (or other modes of transmission such as congenital or sexual, etc)
  • They looked for 19 antigens which is unheard of for average folk!
  • They found Lyme (antibodies) in nearly everyone – even the controls!  This, to me, is the real finding. 
  • Their suggestion to “screen for anti-Borrelia antibodies in COVID patients” to identify potential “high risk” patients only has one flaw:  testing sucks and is not to be trusted!

Category:

Activism, Lyme, research, Testing, Treatment, Viruses