Big Tech, Big Media, and Big Government love to play doctor, but only your chosen physician should be involved in your private healthcare decisions, and no one should be silencing front line first responders.
America’s Frontline Doctors takes the truth directly to the people, with a cross-country road tour headlined by AFLDS.org founder Dr. Simone Gold delivering a profound diagnosis of 2020’s viral propaganda, combatting “The Religion of Public Health”, and also featuring practicing AFLDS physicians and attorneys bringing the unbiased and uncensored facts related to science, medicine, and civil liberties.
At every turn, AFLDS has been a consistent and credible voice for transparency, evidence-based science, ethical practice, and common sense. The Uncensored Truth Tour is a relentless pursuit of the real facts that every person needs to make informed decisions. Each tour stop will engage local communities in a critical conversation about healthcare, the law, and how all Americans can protect both their health and their freedom.
Tucker Carlson: How Many Americans Have Died After Taking COVID Vaccines?
Fox News commentator, Tucker Carlson, cited government statistics showing more Americans have died after getting the COVID vaccine in four months than from all other vaccines combined in more than a decade and a half.
The Defender is experiencing censorship on many social channels. Be sure to stay in touch with the news that matters by subscribing to our top news of the day. It’s free.
Fox News commentator, Tucker Carlson, frequently reminds viewers that overall, he thinks vaccines are a good thing — but that doesn’t mean he doesn’t have questions about COVID vaccines.
In fact, he has a lot of questions. And, he said, he should have the right to ask them.
In the segment below on last night’s “Tucker Carlson Tonight,” Carlson said the U.S. government’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) shows 3,362 Americans — or 30 people a day — died from the COVID vaccine between December 2020 and last month.
“More people, according to VAERS, have died after getting the shot in four months during a single vaccination campaign than from all other vaccines combined over more than a decade and a half,” said Carlson.
The number of deaths is likely much higher than what VAERS is reporting, Carlson said, citing reports submitted to the Department of Health and Human Services in 2010 that found “fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported by the VAERS system.”
Carlson also mentioned in his segment:
Of all of the MENVEO vaccines given to prevent bacterial meningitis, only one person died from the vaccine between 2010 and 2015.
In 1976, 45 million Americans were vaccinated for H1N1. A total of 53 people died from the vaccine. The U.S. government halted the vaccination program because authorities decided it was too risky.
COVID vaccines have contributed to 8,000 hospitalizations in the U.S., according to VAERS.
Go to Top link to watch Tucker Carlson’s segment.
_________________________
**Comment**
Carlson asked great questions that everyone should be asking and demanding answers to.
A few points:
While we keep being told that vast numbers have died from COVID, the CDC has purposely inflated case numbers, which means the numbers are essentially meaningless, similarly to the falsely skewed PCR test results based on faulty perimeters designed to give positives. Historically the CDC only increases Lyme disease numbers when there’s a lucrative Lyme vaccine in the pipeline.
The CDC has a long, sordid history of quietlychanging the rules for its own purposes, and COVID is no exception. As of August 23, 2020, the CDC reported 161,392 fatalities caused by COVID-19, but had the long-standing, original guidelines for death reporting been used, there would have only been 9,684 total fatalities due to COVID-19. That’s a BIG discrepancy.
According to numerous experts, Covid deaths are primarily the consequences of unjustified re-classifications of other wintertime diseases into the “Covid-19” category, notably influenza and pneumonia.
The pressure to receive these experimental, fast-tracked EUA injections which don’t meet the legal definition of a “vaccine”, is astronomical andcompletely wrong. There are numerous excellent reasons to forego “vaccines” and medical treatments/devices. What we are seeing amounts to bullying on a national scale. All medical decisions should be between you and your health care provider and frankly, isn’t anyone else’s businesses.
Besides the plethora of severe adverse reactions and deaths following these injections, is the fact many, many people are testing positive for COVID after receiving them. Questioning their effectiveness is only logical.
Many experts are giving serious warnings about these injections, and essentially state they are needless, ineffective and dangerous. Further, they state that all gene-based vaccines can be expected to cause blood clotting and bleeding disorders. They also point out the severe conflicts of interest in these organizations promoting “vaccines.”
Experts warn there is a risk of Prion disease with these injections.
Experts state there is no need for a COVID vaccine due to the effectivetreatments for it. These treatments and the doctors giving the information are being censored.
Experts warn that countries partaking in mass vaccination drives cause viral immune escape, and that they will initially experience a drop in infectivity rates, but they will inevitably suffer from a steep incline in severe COVID cases in the weeks to come.
Experts warn that these injections are genetic reprogramming without informed consent, that they are bioweapons, and a serious alarm has been raised that the “vaccinated” are causing harm to the unvaccinated.Video explanation (Approx. 12 Min).
THE PFIZER MRNA VACCINE CLINICAL TRIAL STUDY DESIGN WARNS AGAINST PROXIMITY (SHARED AIR INHALATION OR SKIN CONTACT) BETWEEN VACCINE PARTICIPANTS AND THE UNVACCINATED AS A POSSIBLE VECTORS OF HARM
Vaccine manufacturers are stating these injections are 95% effective. In this important article, we learn that it’s all about relative risk. When suspected and confirmed cases are factored in, the 95% relative risk drops down to 19%. The BMJ’s Doshi has shown that vaccine manufacturers are not above inappropriately excluding data, deviating from study protocols (and then hiding the deviations), using unofficially unblinded study groups and keeping raw data (even when taxpayer-funded) to themselves.
The Chicago internist who administered ivermectin to Nurije Fype (the woman in the story below) testified at a court hearing that Fype was weaned off a ventilator & discharged after receiving small amounts of ivermectin for 20 consecutive days. True to form, the ‘authorities that be’ say she may have recovered on her own. The CDC reiterates its warning to doctors that ivermectin is not authorized or approved by the FDA for the prevention or treatment of COVID, but they are quite content the FDA approved the Pfizer COVID jab:
despite no oversight or control group receiving a placebo
when absolute risk is taken into account the “approved” Pfizer shot has an efficacy of just .84%
JFK and Dr. Nass state the FDA appears to be purposely tricking citizens into giving up their right to refuse an experimental product due to the bizarre way it was approved
leaked Pfizer indemnification agreement issue gives Pfizer complete indemnity, gives the purchaser no way of canceling the contract, demands countries put up sovereign assets including bank reserves, military bases, embassy buildings and more as collateral, and admits that long-term effects & efficacy are not currently known and there may be adverse effects.
Yet ivermectin, a drug on the WHO list of essential medicine that has been used for decades is now suddenly dangerous. Think about that.
Judge Orders Hospital to Give COVID Patient Ivermectin
— Drug to be given to comatose Illinois patient after docs refused
by Jennifer Henderson, Enterprise & Investigative Writer, MedPage Today May 4, 2021
Despite no evidence of efficacy in the treatment of COVID-19, an Illinois judge has ordered a hospital to give ivermectin to a comatose patient with few options left.
Judge James Orel of DuPage County ordered Edward-Elmhurst Hospital to allow 68-year-old COVID-19 patient Nurije Fype to receive the drug, even though it isn’t endorsed by federal health agencies, the Chicago Tribune reported.
Fox 32 Chicago reported that Fype, who has been in the intensive care unit since early last month and is currently on a ventilator, has since received her first dose.
Her daughter, Desareta Fype, enlisted the help of a New York law firm that has taken on other ivermectin cases to force the hospital’s hand after none of its doctors would agree to administer the drug, according to the local media outlets. The Tribune reported Tuesday that an outside doctor was granted credentials at the hospital to administer the ivermectin. (See link for article)
______________________
**Comment**
The only reason this family member even heard of Ivermectin was due to another judge ordering a hospital to give it to a dying woman. The family and attorneys believe ivermectin saved her life.
You know it’s bad when the courts have to get involved for life-saving medical treatment.
The Medscape article states the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC) posted its own review and analysis of ivermectin’s anti-viral/anti-inflammatory properties on its website, as if it’s a quack group publishing fake news.
But this is where we are currently at – which is nothing new for Lyme/MSIDS patients. We’ve been straddling this ugly polarized fence for over 40 years – understanding our public ‘authorities’ are biased, ignore world-wide research, and have vested interests(money and power), which make them untrustworthy and incapable of making public health policy.
These bought-out “Health regulators” caution its use as it is not “approved” for the prevention & treatment of COVID, and then lists truly “rare” side effects of nausea, vomiting, limb swelling, drop in blood pressure, and other adverse reactions. Ivermectin has decades of safe use. Not to mention, the dosage for COVID is minuscule and typically consists of approximately 4 doses in total – hardly enough to cause any side-effects at all.
Evidently the FDA needs additional testing done to make up its mind – despite the plethora of research already done on its effectiveness for COVID.
These public ‘authorities’ bad-mouthing, censoring, and banning Ivermectin, HCQ, and other treatments have severe conflicts of interest and should not be entrusted with public health.
Lastly, I’ve written this article to demonstrate how the CDC rigs treatment guidelines for their own purposes. This article reveals how the CDC insists upon their own faulty tests, again, for their own purposes, which is a threat to national security. By controlling testing and treatment guidelines, they then effectively control the narrative about a disease and then playnumbersgames to frighten the public into taking whatever lucrative test,drug or vaccinethey stand to profit from. These public ‘authorities’ then thwart efforts at tracking severe reactions and deaths caused by their lucrative vaccines and injections. It’s widely known that the VAERS vaccine reporting system only picks up 1% of adverse reactions/deaths as it is. Thwarting this system only makes this problem worse. Independent research on VAERS states the system is “utterly inadequate.”
Our conflict-riddled public ‘authorities’ have a lot to answer for. We truly need a CDC/NIAD/FDA walkaway movement.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — This article is prefaced with a shout-out to the good Dr. Carrie Madej (maa-DAY).
She is one of thousands of doctors and scientists worldwide suddenly labeled “conspiracy theorists” and “disinformation” by mainstream and social media. They tell peer-reviewed truth about COVID-19 and experimental shots. Dr. Madej is still on Twitter and Facebook for now. She is also featured in a viral video warning people about experiment mRNA and viral vector shots.
“The Supreme Court ruled that if there is anything synthetic, not from nature, inside of our genome, then whoever owns the patent on those synthetic parts now owns part or all of you as a human. That means Bill and Melinda Gates et al., The Department of Defense, et al. can literally own a human being. If this synthetic code is taken up into your genome, by law, you could be owned overnight.”
All legitimate doctors and scientists welcome fact-checking and peer-review. Turns out Dr. Madej is onto something, and further affirms every reason not to volunteer for these experimental injections. (See link for article)
________________________
Important excerpt:
The case that provides the blueprint for pharmaceutical companies claiming ownership of your genes is Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., 569 U.S. 576 (2013). This case originated from a Utah-based company called Myriad Genetics.
The company isolated the location and sequence of naturally-occurring genes called BRCA1 and BRCA2. Mutations in these genes positively correlate with predispositions to breast and ovarian cancers. Myriad filed patents on these genes in 1994 and 1995, respectively. The patents gave Myriad exclusive rights to cancer genetic testing that isolated natural DNA strands and created synthetic complementary DNA (cDNA) that resembled the original isolated strands.
The USPTO granted both patents in 1998.At least 2,000 other human genes had been patented through 2010, according to the New York State Bar. But the Myriad patents hindered other scientists from doing research on naturally-occurring BRCA1 and BRCA2, and thus hindered breast and ovarian cancer testing by other companies.
Makers of COVID-19 vaccines are now destroying long-term safety studies by unblinding their trials and giving the control groups the active vaccine, claiming it is “unethical” to withhold an effective vaccine
In so doing, they make it virtually impossible to assess any long-term safety and effectiveness, and the true benefit versus cost
It’s ironic, because vaccine mandates are being justified on the premise that the benefit to the community is more important than an individual’s risk of harm. Yet vaccine manufacturers are saying that participants in the control groups are harmed by not getting the vaccine, and saving the individual is more important than securing the data needed to make public health decisions
Getting the active vaccine comes with risk, not merely benefit. This is particularly true for the novel mRNA technology used in COVID-19 vaccines
As of April 1, 2021, VAERS had received 56,869 adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination, including 7,971 serious injuries and 2,342 deaths.Of those deaths, 28% occurred within 48 hours of vaccination. The youngest person to die was 18 years old
While reports of side effects from COVID-19 gene therapies, including life-threatening effects and deaths, continue to climb at breakneck speed,1 a one-sided narrative of safety and effectiveness permeates mainstream media and medical news.
These “vaccines” are so safe and so effective, according to this narrative, that keeping control groups intact for long-term study and comparison of outcomes is now being derided as “unethical,” despite the fact that there is absolutely no non-fraudulent data to support their perverse assertions. Truly, what we’re watching is the active destruction of basic medical science in a surreal dystopian nightmare.
Vaccine Makers to Ditch Control Groups
Consider this report in JAMA by Rita Rubin, senior writer for JAMA medical news and perspectives, for example.2 According to Rubin, the launch of “two highly efficacious” COVID-19 vaccines has “spurred debate about the ethics, let alone the feasibility, of continuing or launching blinded, placebo-controlled trials …”
Rubin recounts how Moderna representatives told a Food and Drug Administration advisory panel that rather than letting thousands of vaccine doses to go to waste, they planned to offer them to trial participants who had received placebo.
Pfizer representatives made a similar announcement to the advisory panel. According to a news analysis published in The BMJ,3 the FDA and U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are both onboard with this plan, as is the World Health Organization.4
In the JAMA report by Rubin, Moncref Slaoui, Ph.D., chief scientific adviser for Operation Warp Speed, is quoted saying he thinks “it’s very important that we unblind the trial at once and offer the placebo group vaccines” because trial participants “should be rewarded” for their participation.
All of these statements violate the very basics of what a safety trial needs, which is a control group against which you can compare the effects of the drug or vaccine in question over the long term. I find it inconceivable that unblinding is even a consideration at this point, seeing how the core studies have not even concluded yet. The only purpose of this unblinding is to conceal the fraud that these vaccines are safe.
None of the COVID-19 vaccines currently on the market are actually licensed. They only have emergency use authorization — which, incidentally, also forbids them from being mandated, although this is being widely and conveniently ignored — as trials are still ongoing.
At the earliest, they may be licensed two years from now, at the completion of the follow-up studies.5 This is why those in the military are allowed to refuse it, and refuse they have. Among Marines, the refusal rate is nearly 40%.6
So, before the initial studies are even completed, vaccine makers and regulatory agencies are now deciding to forgo long-term safety evaluations altogether by giving placebo recipients the real McCoy, and so-called bioethicists are actually supporting this madness. As reported in The BMJ:7
“Although the FDA has granted the vaccines emergency use authorization, to get full license approval two years of follow-up data are needed. The data are now likely to be scanty and less reliable given that the trials are effectively being unblinded.”
Hypocrisy Abounds
It’s ironic in the extreme, because vaccine mandates are being justified on the premise that the benefit to the community supersedes the risk of individual harm. In other words, it’s OK if some people are harmed by the vaccine because the overall benefit to society is more important.
Yet here they’re saying that participants in the control groups are being harmed by not getting the vaccine, so therefore vaccine makers have an obligation to give it to them before the long-term studies are completed. This is the complete opposite argument used for mandatory vaccination.
If we are to accept the “greater good” justification for vaccination, then people who agree to participate in a study, and end up getting a placebo, need to roll the dice and potentially sacrifice their health “for the greater good.” Here, the greater good is the study itself, the results of which are of crucial importance for public health decisions.
Without this data, we will never know whether the vaccines work in the long term and/or what their side effects are. If an individual in the control group gets COVID-19, then that’s the price of scientific participation for the greater good of society, just as when a vaccinated person gets harmed, that’s considered an acceptable price for creating vaccine-induced herd immunity.
Put another way, when it comes to mandating vaccines, harm to the individual is acceptable, but when it comes to doing proper safety studies, all of a sudden, harm to the individual is not acceptable, and protecting the controls is more important than protecting the integrity of the research. The fact that they’re this inconsistent in their “ethics” could be viewed as proof positive that public health isn’t even a remote concern.
Scientific Ethics Are Eroding
Apparently, concern about risk to the individual only matters when vaccine makers have everything to gain. By eliminating control groups, we’ll have no way of really proving the harm that these “vaccines” might impart over time, as all participants will be in the same proverbial boat.
I remain confident that we’ll continue to see many more health problems and deaths develop in time, but without control groups, these trends can more easily be written off as “normal” and/or blamed on something else. As noted by Dr. Steven Goodman, associate dean of clinical and translational research at Stanford University, who is quoted in Rubin’s JAMA article:8
“By unblinding trial participants, ‘you lose a valid comparison group,’ Goodman said. ‘There will be this sense, and it will be sort of true, that the study is over.’ Unlike, say, a highly effective cancer drug, ‘the vaccine is not literally a life-and-death issue today and tomorrow’ for most trial participants, Goodman said.
So, he noted, those running COVID-19 vaccine trials shouldn’t feel obligated to unblind participants and vaccinate placebo recipients right away. Doing so implies ‘you can just blow up the trial’ on the basis of promising preliminary results, establishing ‘an ethical model for future trials that we maybe don’t want to set,’ Goodman said.”
Indeed, this strategy will set a dangerous precedent that will probably lead to vaccine and drug studies being conducted without control groups in the future, which could spell the end of medical science as we know it. At bare minimum, future variations of the current COVID-19 vaccine trials are likely to be conducted without control groups.
Trial Participants Told Not to Unblind Themselves
Goodman is also quoted in another article,9 this one in MedPage Today, discussing the problems with trial participants unblinding themselves by taking an antibody test:
“‘There is no good scientific reason for someone to do this,’ he told MedPage Today. ‘I can understand why they want that information, but it can only serve to diminish the value of the trial. Getting tested is not right unless there is a pressing need for unblinding for health reasons.'”
Here, yet another hypocritical irony arises, as the reason they don’t want trial participants to unblind themselves is because if they know they got the vaccine, they’re statistically more likely to take more risks that might expose them to the virus.
This, then, will skew the results and “could make the vaccine look less effective than it is,” Dr. Elizabeth McNally of Northwestern University explained to MedPage Today.10 So, whether vaccine scientists agree with unblinding or not, unblinding really only has to do with whether it will skew results in their favor.
Trial participants unblinding themselves might make the vaccine appear less effective if they alter their behavior as a consequence, whereas vaccine makers unblinding the entire control group will allow them to hide side effects, even if participants alter their behavior.
Justification for Elimination of Controls Is Flimsy at Best
While pro-vaccine advocates insist the elimination of control groups is justified on the “moral grounds” that it’s unethical to not provide volunteers with something of value, this argument completely ignores the undeniable fact that no vaccine is 100% safe.
Getting the active vaccine comes with risk, not merely benefit. This is particularly true for the novel mRNA technology used in COVID-19 vaccines. Historical data are troubling to say the least, and the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) is rapidly filling up with COVID-19 vaccine-related injury reports and deaths.
Reports of Side Effects and Deaths Are Piling Up
As reported by The Defender,11 as of April 1, 2021, VAERS had received 56,869 adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination, including 7,971 serious injuries and 2,342 deaths. Of those deaths, 28% occurred within 48 hours of vaccination! The youngest person to die was 18 years old. There were also 110 reports of miscarriage or premature birth among pregnant women.
COVID-19 vaccines accounted for 70% of the annual vaccine deaths, even though these vaccines had only been available for less than two months!
In my view, it’s unconscionable and morally reprehensible to not take these data into account. Clearly, these “vaccines” have risks. Pretending like they don’t, and that all placebo recipients in vaccine trials are at a distinct disadvantage simply isn’t true.
Keep in mind that we still do not know the percentage of adverse effects being reported. Is it between 1%12 and 10%13 as past inquiries into VAERS reporting have shown, or is it higher?
If only 10% are reported, we may be looking at 23,420 deaths, but if it is as low as 1%, it jumps to more than 230,000 deaths. We will never know because there are major attempts to suppress this information, as we have already witnessed with the deaths of sport celebrities Hank Aaron and Marvin Hagler, both of whom died shortly after COVID vaccinations.
Regardless, it’s hard to justify even a single death of an otherwise healthy individual, seeing how the survival rate for COVID-19 across all age groups is 99.74%. If you’re younger than 40, your survival rate is 99.99%.14
There’s every reason to suspect that these reports account for just a small percentage of actual side effects. Just think of all those who get the vaccine at grocery stores or temporary vaccination sites, for example. First of all, are all Americans even aware that VAERS exists and that they need to file a report if they suffer an adverse reaction post-COVID vaccination?
Who is going to file the adverse report if you get vaccinated in a grocery or convenience store? Will they return to the pharmacist and report their side effects? Will the pharmacist file the report? Who’s responsible for filing the report if you go to a temporary vaccination site?
CDC Stays Mum on How It’s Ensuring Reporting Compliance
According to the CDC, deaths from COVID-19 vaccines are required to be reported to VAERS.15 It’s not supposed to be voluntary, as with other vaccines. However, it is not being transparent about how it is ensuring this “requirement” is being followed, so it’s impossible to confirm that all related deaths are in fact being reported. As reported by The Defender:16
“We … inquired about whether healthcare providers are reporting all injuries and deaths that might be connected to the COVID vaccine, and what education initiatives are in place to encourage and facilitate proper and accurate reporting.
Twenty-two days later a representative from the CDC’s Vaccine Task Force responded by saying the agency had never received our questions — even though the employees we talked to several times said their press officers were working through the questions we sent. We provided the questions again and requested a response by April 7. To date, the CDC has not responded despite our repeated follow-up attempts.”
Absolute Versus Relative Risk Reduction
Vaccine makers are also very careful about only referencing relative risk, not absolute risk. By doing so, the vaccines appear far more protective than they actually are. It’s a commonly used statistical trick that I encourage you to familiarize yourself with.
For example, in his November 26, 2020, BMJ article,17 Peter Doshi, associate editor of The BMJ, pointed out that while Pfizer claims its vaccine is 95% effective, this is the relative risk reduction.
The absolute risk reduction — which is far more relevant for public health measures — is actually less than 1%!
I recommend listening to the interview with Dr. Ron Brown above, in which he explains the ins and outs of relative and absolute risks, and the differences between them. He’s also written two papers detailing the problems with this kind of reporting bias: “Outcome Reporting Bias in COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Clinical Trials”18 and “Public Health Lessons Learned From Biases in Coronavirus Mortality Overestimation.”19
You Likely Don’t Need a Vaccine
If you’re concerned about vaccine side effects, please understand there are several prevention strategies and treatments readily available that have been shown to be highly effective, which means the need for a vaccine in the first place is nearly moot.
What to Do if You Got the Vaccine and Are Having Problems
In closing, if you got the vaccine and now regret it, you may be able to address your symptoms using the same strategies you’d use to treat actual SARS-CoV-2 infection.
I’ve written many articles over the past year detailing simple strategies to improve your immune system, and with a healthy immune system, you’ll get through COVID-19 without incident. Below, I’ll summarize some of the strategies you can use both to prevent COVID-19 and address any side effects you may encounter from the vaccine.
• Eat a “clean,” ideally organic diet. Avoid processed foods of all kinds, especially vegetable oils, as they are loaded with damaging omega-6 linoleic acid that wrecks your mitochondrial function. Linoleic acid has been shown to increase mortality from COVID-19.
• Consider nutritional ketosis and a time-restricted eating window of six to eight hours with no food at least three hours before bed. These strategies will help you optimize your metabolic machinery and mitochondrial function.
• Implement a detoxification program to get rid of heavy metals and glyphosate. This is important as these toxins contribute to inflammation. To improve detoxification, I recommend activating your natural glutathione production with molecular hydrogen tablets.
A simple way to block glyphosate uptake is to take glycine. Approximately 3 grams, about half a teaspoon, a few times a day should be sufficient, along with an organic diet, so that you’re not adding more glyphosate with each meal.
• Maintain a neutral pH to improve the resiliency of your immune system. You want your pH to be right around 7, which you can measure with an inexpensive urine strip. The lower your pH, the more acidic you are. A simple way to raise your pH if it’s too acidic (and most people are) is to take one-fourth teaspoon of sodium bicarbonate (baking soda) or potassium bicarbonate in water a few times a day.
Nutritional supplementation can also be helpful. Among the most important are:
Vitamin D — Vitamin D supplements are readily available and one of the least expensive supplements on the market. All things considered, vitamin D optimization is likely the easiest and most beneficial strategy that anyone can do to minimize their risk of COVID-19 and other infections, and can strengthen your immune system in a matter of a few weeks.
N-acetylcysteine (NAC) — NAC is a precursor to reduced glutathione, which appears to play a crucial role in COVID-19. According to one literature analysis,20 glutathione deficiency may actually be associated with COVID-19 severity, leading the author to conclude that NAC may be useful both for its prevention and treatment.
Zinc — Zinc plays a very important role in your immune system’s ability to ward off viral infections. Like vitamin D, zinc helps regulate your immune function21 — and a combination of zinc with a zinc ionophore, like hydroxychloroquine or quercetin, was in 2010 shown to inhibit SARS coronavirus in vitro. In cell culture, it also blocked viral replication within minutes.22Importantly, zinc deficiency has been shown to impair immune function.23
Melatonin — This boosts immune function in a variety of ways and helps quell inflammation. Melatonin may also prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection by recharging glutathione24 and enhancing vitamin D synthesis, among other things.
Vitamin C — A number of studies have shown vitamin C can be very helpful in the treatment of viral illnesses, sepsis and ARDS,25 all of which are applicable to COVID-19. Its basic properties include anti-inflammatory, immunomodulatory, antioxidant, antithrombotic and antiviral activities. At high doses, it actually acts as an antiviral drug, actively inactivating viruses. Vitamin C also works synergistically with quercetin.26
Quercetin — A powerful immune booster and broad-spectrum antiviral, quercetin was initially found to provide broad-spectrum protection against SARS coronavirus in the aftermath of the 2003 SARS epidemic,27,28,29 and evidence suggests it may be useful for the prevention and treatment of SARS-CoV-2 as well.
B vitamins — B vitamins can also influence several COVID-19-specific disease processes, including30 viral replication and invasion, cytokine storm induction, adaptive immunity and hypercoagulability.
Type 1 interferon — Type 1 interferon prevents viral replication and helps degrade the RNA. It’s available in spray form that you can spray directly into your throat or nose. You can try taking a couple of sprays per day prophylactically, and more if you have a cough, fever or headache.
Report All COVID-19 Vaccine Side Effects
Last but not least, if you or someone you love have received a COVID-19 vaccine and are experiencing side effects, report it. The Children’s Health Defense is calling on all who have suffered a side effect from a COVID-19 vaccine to do three things:31
Just today we learn that VAERS is under attack,not for the severe under-reporting, but due to the thousands of adverse events recently reported on the COVID-19 injections. This information just doesn’t fit the accepted narrative that “vaccines are safe and effective.” Now, Politifact, while brushing off the reports of reactions and deaths, accuse “anti-vaccine groups & activists” of filling up the system with “unverified, incomplete numbers to advance far-reaching claims.” It doesn’t take a brain surgeon to see where this is headed.
