Now WHY does satanic, Jewwy Big-Pharma HATE ivermectin, suckers?--because it works and is pretty safe too?--obviously, morons

[Apollonian]

Can Ivermectin Treat Cancer? New Evidence Might Surprise You!​

---

by Noah 1 day ago

Link: https://wltreport.com/2023/10/12/ca...ce-might-surprise/?utm_source=newsletter_ssp/

[see lots of vids at site link, above]

Let’s get something out of the way right up front in this article….
I’m not a doctor.
I’m not even a scientist.
Nothing in this article has been evaluated or approved by the FDA — but let’s be honest, that probably just means you should pay EXTRA attention to it, right?

Ok, we all good with the disclaimer?
Great!
I’m a reporter and I report on what I see….
And right now I’m seeing a ton of people talking about Ivermectin as a possible treatment for cancer.
Let me give a SECOND disclaimer: do NOT read this article and stop taking cancer treatments or stop doing what your doctor tells you to do.
Listen to you doctor!
But….Ivermectin has been called a “Wonder Drug” (more on that in a minute) and NINE new scientific, peer-reviewed studies are showing it may be effective in treating or curing cancer….AND it’s safer that Aspirin!
So if it were me, and I can only tell you what I would do, but if it were me or one of my family members, we’d listen to our doctor but I think I’d also be taking a high dose of Ivermectin on the side.
Read this for more on how incredibly SAFE Ivermectin is:

Now let’s dig in and I’ll show you everything I’m seeing about Ivermectin and Cancer…
We start on Twitter but we will end with peer-reviewed, scientific studies.
Nine of them, to be exact.
Let’s start here:

Once again, I can only talk about what I would do, but I’m considering going on a high dose Ivermectin treatment once per year as preventative medicine:

And is this why Big Pharma hates it so much?

Now let’s get scientific….
You know, REAL science, not “Fauci-ism”.
From The Journal of Antibiotics, published 2/15/17:

Read the full article yourself here.
“…unmatched value of an extraordinary drug…”
“…Antibacterial, antiviral and anti-cancer agent…”
Folks, that isn’t my take or someone on Twitter or TikTok.
That is a medical journal.
Let’s do another one….
From PubMed:

Read the full article yourself here.
“…led many to describe it as a ‘wonder’ drug.”
Let’s do another…
From the NIH.gov:

Read the full article here.
“…powerful antitumor effects…in a variety of cancer cells.”
I repeat, this is not MY opinion, this is a medical journal!
In fact, there are MANY articles that all come to the same conclusion, across multiple different types of cancers.


Here are 9 of them, from VigilantNews:

Papers reviewed:​

• 2023 Sep.23 – Man-Yuan Li et al – Ivermectin induces nonprotective autophagy by downregulating PAK1 and apoptosis in lungadenocarcinoma cells
• 2023 May – Samy et al – Eprinomectin: a derivative of ivermectin suppresses growth and metastatic phenotypes of prostatecancer cells by targeting the β-catenin signaling pathway
• 2022 Nov – Lotfalizadeh et al – The Anticancer potential of Ivermectin: Mechanisms of action and therapeutic implications
• 2022 Oct – Jian Liu et al – Progress in Understanding the Molecular Mechanisms Underlying the Antitumour Effects of Ivermectin
• 2022 Jun – Daeun Lee et al – Ivermectin suppresses pancreatic cancer via mitochondria dysfunction
• 2021 Aug – Shican Zhou et al – Ivermectin has New Application in Inhibiting Colorectal Cancer Cell Growth
• 2021 Jan – Mingyang Tang et al – Ivermectin, a potential anticancer drug derived from an antiparasitic drug
• 2019 Sep Intuyod et al – Anti-parasitic Drug Ivermectin Exhibits Potent Anticancer Activity Against Gemcitabine-resistant Cholangiocarcinoma In Vitro
• 2018 Feb – Juarez et al – The multitargeted drug ivermectin: from an antiparasitic agent to a repositioned cancer drug

You can see that FULL article over on MakisMD Substack here.
Now for the most obvious question:

Need LEGAL and SAFE Ivermectin? Read This!​

We just reported yesterday that a new leaked report says airlines are looking to BRING BACK MASKS in October.
Yes, really.
I fully expect a new “planned-demic” will show up right in time for the 2024 election.
Oh they might not call it “COVID” again and probably they won’t.
But I fully expect a new one to hit.
And I’m going to be prepared this time.
Whether it comes in the form of a bioweapon or something much more mundane like a tick bite or a Bill Gates’ mosquito – you and your family need to be prepared. That’s where The Wellness Company comes in.
You know the Wellness Company and their great doctors – like Dr. Peter McCullough and Dr. Jim Thorp – are regularly in the media speaking out against the broken medical establishment.
Dr. Thorp, one of the nation’s leading critics of the corrupting influence of big pharma, believes that now – more than ever – people should be prepared for the next pandemic.

“I’ve strongly recommended “stock piling” critical medications including antibiotics since the turn of the century. This has been an incredible investment as many friends, family and patients have benefited. Now, in summer of 2023, this recommendation is even more crucial.” – Dr. Jim Thorp

The Wellness Company and their doctors are medical professionals that you can trust and their new medical emergency kits are the gold standard when it comes to keeping you safe and healthy.
Be ready for anything, this medical emergency kit contains an assortment of live-saving medications – including ivermectin and Z-pak. The medical emergency kit provides a guidebook to aid in the safe use of all of these life-saving medications.
From anthrax to tick bites to COVID and even to a bioweapon like the plague – the Wellness Company’s Medical Emergency kit is exactly what you need to have on hand to be prepared.
Rest assured knowing that you have emergency antibiotics, antivirals and anti-parasitics on hand to help keep you and your family safe from whatever the globalists throw at us next!
The Wellness Company Medical Emergency Kit includes:

• Amoxicillin-Clavulanate (generic Augmentin) 875/125 mg – 28 tablets
• Azithromycin (generic Z-Pak) 250 mg – 12 tablets
• Doxycycline Hyclate 100 mg – 60 capsules
• Metronidazole (generic Flagyl) 500 mg – 30 tablets
• Trimethoprim-Sulfamethoxazole (generic Bactrim) 800/160 mg – 28 tablets
• Ivermectin 18mg – 7 compounded capsules
• Fluconazole (generic Diflucan) 150 mg – 2 tablets
• Ondansetron (generic Zofran) 4mg – 6 tablets
• 1 virtual consult from a doctor you can trust
• 1 Emergency Medication Guidebook written by our Chief Medical Board for safe use.

The Wellness Company Medical Emergency Kit treats:

• Anthrax
• Bacterial Vaginosis
• Bite Wounds
• Bronchitis
• Chlamydia
• Clostridioides difficile
• Colitis
• COVID – 19
• Gonorrhea
• Giardiasis
• Lice
• Nausea & Vomiting
• Pharyngitis
• Pinworms
• Plague (bioterror)
• Pneumonia
• Rickettsial Infections
• Scabies
• Shigella Infection
• Sinusitis
• Skin Infection
• Strep Throat
• Syphilis
• Tetanus
• Tick Exposure
• Tonsillitis
• Traveler’s Diarrhea
• Trichomoniasis
• Tularemia (bioterror)
• Urinary Tract Infection
• Vaginal Candidiasis
• Viral Upper Respiratory Infection

Don’t be caught unprepared. Don’t be reliant on the broken and corrupt medical industrial complex. Don’t regret not acting today.
Order The Wellness Company’s Medical Emergency Kits today!

(Note: Thank you for supporting businesses like the one presenting a sponsored message below and ordering through the links below, which benefits WLT Report. We appreciate your support!)
RELATED:

​

We Were RIGHT About Ivermectin From Day One!​

PAGING DOCTOR FLIP-FLOP!
DOCTOR FLIP-FLOP, PLEASE REPORT TO THE OPERATING ROOM!
In a 180 degree flip-flop a politician would be jealous of, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) now admits doctors can prescribe Ivermectin to treat COVID-19.
Yes, really.
During the COVID-19 plandemic, the FDA did everything possible to prevent doctors from prescribing the antiviral to treat COVID-19.
The corrupt agency compared people seeking ivermectin to horses.

The federal government, mainstream media, Big Tech, and pharmacies created numerous barriers to prevent COVID-19 patients from obtaining ivermectin for treatment.
After millions of Americans lined up to take the experimental COVID-19 shots, the FDA changed course to say doctors can prescribe ivermectin for COVID-19.

According to The Epoch Times, the “‘FDA explicitly recognizes that doctors do have the authority to prescribe ivermectin to treat COVID,’ Ashley Cheung Honold, a Department of Justice lawyer representing the FDA, said during oral arguments on Aug. 8 in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit.”

From The Epoch Times:

The government is defending the FDA’s repeated exhortations to people to not take ivermectin for COVID-19, including a post that said “Stop it.”
The case was brought by three doctors who allege the FDA unlawfully interfered with their practice of medicine with the statements. A federal judge dismissed the case in 2022, prompting an appeal.
“The fundamental issue in this case is straightforward. After the FDA approves the human drug for sale, does it then have the authority to interfere with how that drug is used within the doctor-patient relationship? The answer is no,” Jared Kelson, representing the doctors, told the appeals court.

The FDA explicitly stated that ivermectin “isn’t authorized or approved to treat COVID-19.”
However, the agency attempted to excuse its corruption.
“FDA made these statements in response to multiple reports of consumers being hospitalized, after self medicating with ivermectin intended for horses, which is available for purchase over the counter without the need for prescription,” Honold said.
In an interview with Maria Bartiromo, Senator Ron Johnson described the destruction caused by the actions of the FDA.
“The doctors I’ve been dealing with and talking to for yours now, they believe that probably hundreds of thousands of Americans lost their lives because they were denied early treatment,” Johnson said.
“And they were denied it because the FDA sabotaged, for example, ivermectin. And they said, come on, you all, you’re not a cow, you’re not a horse. You know, this is supposedly horse medicine. No, this was a Nobel Prize-winning medicine that could have saved hundreds of thousands of lives.”

WATCH:

Read more from the court exchange from The Epoch Times:

Ms. Honold said that the FDA didn’t purport to require anyone to do anything or to prohibit anyone from doing anything.
“What about when it said, ‘No, stop it’?” Circuit Judge Jennifer Walker Elrod, on the panel that is hearing the appeal, asked. “Why isn’t that a command? If you were in English class, they would say that was a command.”
Ms. Honold described the statements as “merely quips.”
“Can you answer the question, please? Is that a command, ‘Stop it’?” Judge Elrod asked.
“In some contexts, those words could be construed as a command,” Ms. Honold said. “But in this context, where FDA was simply using these words in the context of a quippy tweet meant to share its informational article, those statements do not rise to the level of a command.”
The statements “don’t prohibit doctors from prescribing ivermectin to treat COVID or for any other purpose” Ms. Honold said. She noted that the FDA, along with the statements, said that people should consult their health care providers about COVID-19 treatments and that they could take medicine if it was prescribed by the provider.
“FDA is clearly acknowledging that doctors have the authority to prescribe human ivermectin to treat COVID. So they are not interfering with the authority of doctors to prescribe drugs or to practice medicine,” she said.

We actually told you all of this YEARS ago!
Our reporting has been spot on from Day 1, nice to see the FDA catching up to us, but very sad it took so long.
Here is one of our prior reports:

CONFIRMED: The True Story of Ivermectin Now Coming Out!​

I continue to bring you the REAL news about Ivermectin….
Real, unfiltered news with no bias.
Just the facts, ma’am!
Like this one for example:
Two Separate Doctors Claim OVER 100 Members of Congress Treated With Ivermectin!
Anyone else mad yet?
But here’s the deal…
Now the FDA is backtracking big time, trying to claim they never said you couldn’t take Ivermectin.
Yes, really…hard to even believe!
But it’s true, look at this:


And this:


They knew all along:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1603157314147868672

In fact, some studies are now showing it MIGHT be highly effective at destroying cancer:


Catturd right again:


A wave of truth is coming out:


Here is Dr. Peter McCullough:


Just remember we told you the TRUTH all along…
They didn’t want you to see this but we showed you from Day 1!
Watch it here on Rumble:

Remember this disclaimer:
I am not a doctor. I am not giving you medical advice. I’m a REPORTER. I research and I report and I give you the full story open and honestly so YOU can decide.
Now let’s go to another video.
This woman below documented her own journey with Ivermectin on video.
She starts off looking not so good but makes a swift turnaround in just a few days.
This is not me talking, listen to her share and document her own story….
Here is the video from Rumble:

Now let’s talk about the MSM disinformation campaign, which is a nice way of saying “outright lies and propaganda”.
Look, I will give you one disclaimer before we get started: I am a journalist and not anyone with any medical expertise. I’m not a doctor and I’m not giving medical advice.
I’m just presenting you with the results of my research that the MSM really seems to want to hide….
And I know how to do my research.
So let’s start with this:

Now let’s unpack all the lies the MSM has been telling you about Ivermectin.
You would assume based on all the MSM propaganda that Ivermectin is only approved for Horses and not Humans.
The only problem with that?
It’s not true.
Not even close.
Here’s the real truth:

---------------------------------------------------------[END OF PART ONE; SEE BELOW FOR PART 2]----------------------------------------------------

 

[Apollonian]

-----------------------------------------------------[HERE'S PART 2 TO ABOVE]-----------------------------------------------------------


Yes folks, that is a statement taken from PolitiFact’s very own fact-checking page about Ivermectin.
But what they do with their “Face Check” is so insidious….
Here’s how PolitiFact tries to claim that the TRUE statement is still somehow false, watch these mental gymnastics:

This post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.)
It is true that ivermectin was approved by the Food and Drug Administration that year — but not to treat the coronavirus. The drug was approved for strongyloidiasis, a disease caused by a roundworm, and onchocerciasis, or river blindness, which is caused by a parasitic worm.
The drug was approved for humans under the brand name Stromectol, National Geographic reported, and since then it’s been recognized as a safe treatment for several tropical diseases caused by parasites. In 2015, two scientists even won a Nobel Prize for their discovery of ivermectin and its use to treat diseases caused by parasites.
But unlike, say, river blindness, COVID-19 is caused by a coronavirus, not by parasites. And as PolitiFact recently reported in a story exploring ivermectin, there’s no conclusive evidence that ivermectin is effective against COVID-19.

The lying and the deception is just so evil, really makes me angry.
If you gave me a full year, I couldn’t come up with all the twists and turns these people take to turn the TRUTH into a lie.
It’s sickening.
But we’re just getting started.
Next come the scare tactics and VERY misleading headlines.
Like this article from WIVB Channel 4 News:

After a recent resurgence in several states, health officials are warning residents to be aware of a dangerous of an unauthorized “treatment” for COVID-19 — often being taken with dangerous consequences.
It’s called ivermectin and it’s used to treat and prevent parasites in animals, the Food and Drug Administration explains. The tablets are not FDA approved for treatment of COVID-19 in humans and isn’t even an anti-viral drug — meaning it has no impact on the coronavirus. And because the large-concentration tablets are intended for large animals, these can be treacherous for humans.
In addition to not being authorized for treatment, there’s no evidence ivermectin treats COVID-19.
“There’s a lot of misinformation around, and you may have heard that it’s okay to take large doses of ivermectin. That is wrong.”
FDA
The FDA and several state officials say they’ve seen an uptick in calamitous use of the drugs, particularly tablets used to treat parasitic worms in horses. While ivermectin is approved for humans to treat certain skin conditions (rosacea) and certain external parasites like head lice, the FDA warns this ivermectin is different than the one used in animals.
On Friday, the Mississippi Department of Health was forced to send out a warning to residents about the dangers of the drug after several poisonings.
The Mississippi Poison Control Center said at least 70% of recent ivermectin-related calls are tied to people taking livestock or animal formulations they bought a livestock supply stores or through online markets.
Eighty-five percent of callers had mild symptoms — these include rash, nausea, vomiting, and abdominal pain — but one person needed evaluation because of how much they’d taken.
More severe dangers of ivermectin ingestion include neurologic disorders, seizures, coma and death.
Use of ivermectin should only be taken if prescribed by a doctor for an FDA-approved use. Regardless of the usage and prescription, the FDA warns ivermectin overdose is still possible. Possible interaction with other medications is also a possibility.

I highlighted the key parts.
A 70% SURGE in Ivermectin Poison Center calls sounds like a lot doesn’t it?
NPR even reports a 245% surge! Oh my!
Sounds bad until you realize according to NPR that the 245% surge is going from 133 calls to 459 calls….NATIONWIDE!

According to the National Poison Data System (NPDS), which collects information from the nation’s 55 poison control centers, there was a 245% jump in reported exposure cases from July to August — from 133 to 459.

Yes folks, out of 333 MILLION people, there were 459 calls to poison centers.
So 0.00000137% of the population.
And those are just calls.
According to the bold part of the Channel 4 article, 85% of those people who called or had symptoms had MILD symptoms like a rash.
The horror!
According to the article, only ONE person needed a further evaluation.
But is this what you hear in the MSM?
No.
If you listed only to the MSM fear-porn, you’d think we had a crisis of Ivermectin deaths.
The truth is the polar opposite.
Anyone else REALLY tired of being lied to?
It’s why I’m here.
I will continue to shout the truth from the rooftops!
But I’m not done yet.
Did you know that Ivermectin has actually been listed even by the corrupt WHO as one of the most “essential medicines” out there?
It’s true, you can read it right here until they take it down.
But I’m not done yet!
Let’s cut right to the chase and go to a medical journal to see the true toxicity data on Ivermectin in humans.
Seems like something JOURNALISTS should do, don’t you think?
Let’s go to INCHEM.org, the WHO’s own website for “Internationally Peer Reviewed Chemical Safety Information”.

They lay it out in black and white and even a non-medical person like me can understand it.
Now let’s go down to Section 7.2 of their report which is about Toxicity in Humans:

I’m going to bold the key part:

7.2 Toxicity
7.2.1 Human data
7.2.1.1 Adults
Amounts approaching the therapeutic doses in
animals (100 to 200 ðg/kg bodyweight) are not
hazardous to humans. Ingestions of large
quantities (10 to 100 times the animal
therapeutic dosage) may produce symptoms
resembling those observed in animal toxicology
studies at high toxic levels.

An adult female accidentally self-injected a
small quantity (approximately 200 ðg/kg)
subcutaneously. Twelve hours later she
experienced colicky pain with nausea but
recovered within 12 hours (MSD, 1988).

Clinical studies of oral ivermectin given in
doses from 2 to 200 ðg/kg (maximum 12 mg) have
shown a pattern of adverse experiences that
included only one serious event (transient
stupor). The remaining adverse experiences were
considered not serious and were chiefly of the
type expected based on the characteristics of
the underlying disease and the responses seen
after treatment with other microfilaricidal
drugs, except for reports of "depression" (not
psychiatrically tested) in four patients in open
studies (MSD, 1988).
7.2.1.2 Children
A 16-month-old boy weighing 15 kg ingested
approximately 100 to 130 mg of ivermectin (as an
injectable solution). Ten hours post-ingestion
he had mydriasis in one pupil, with frequent
vomiting, pallor, 35°C temperature, tachycardia,
somnolence and variable blood pressure. He
developed urticaria the following day, and had
recovered after three days (MSD, 1988).

Let’s start with the very first line: even if you take the ANIMAL dosage, it is “not hazardous to humans”.
Case closed folks.
Seriously, why is this not front page news?
Is it because Ivermectin WORKS and actually treats COVID-19 and they can’t let that happen?
Just asking.
How soon will it be do you think before they take down the WHO website or “edit” it?
Good thing I took screenshots!
Ok, now to address the question everyone is asking: how can I get it?
Here is a new update from the FLCCC, which stands for Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance.
From their page “Prevention and Treatment Protocols” I give you the following:

I also highlight their disclaimer:

And then you can TAP HERE to get the full list of doctors who can assist you.
And if that doesn’t work, I have a second source.
Let’s go to America’s Frontline Doctors, who as their name suggests, are on the frontline of this battle.
They took an oath to heal their patients and they believe many of the things the MSM wants to scare you away from may actually help heal you.
Not my words, theirs…..take a look:
From their website:

Tap here to go to their site.

---

And here is even more, also from America’s Frontline Doctors…..
Here is a graphic that has been circulating:

And now let’s go right to their website….
Here is what they’re calling their Wellness Protocol and it sure seems very normal and common sense to me, how about you?

Then we have their Treatment Options, which again look very reasonable.
Folks, I’m not going to tell you what to do or not do, you have to make up your own mind and consult with your own doctor.
But as a non-medical person, doesn’t this stuff sound like a good idea?

And here it is in a diagram:

I will reiterate here once again what they posted on their website:
THIS IS NOT MEDICAL ADVICE. Every situation is unique and every person must check with his or her own physician, especially if you are taking any other medication.
Good advice. For everyone.
If you are interested in where to buy some of these items, scroll down and I have links for you to some of the best ones.
Want even more?
Then you need to hear from my friend Chris Burres who joined me last weekend on my show to talk about the power of C60.
No, he’s not saying it treats COVID or cures COVID.
But he is saying it appears to supercharge your immune system and help your body in many different ways…..anyone else interested in that?
Me too, and that’s why I had him on my show.
I had a lot of questions for him about C60 and I found the whole thing fascinating!
Yes, I (Noah) personally take C60 and I’ve been taking it for over a year now.
I first started hearing about it online about a year ago and I did my own research on it to find out what it is, where can I get it, and is it really that good….?
First, let me give you my disclaimer once again in bold font: I’m not a doctor and I’m not giving you medical advice. I’m not telling you this is going to treat or cure any condition you have. I’m just telling you what I have personally experienced.
So here’s what I found.
I found that C60 is a powerful antioxidant often described as the “perfect carbon molecule”.
It’s an antioxidant that has been measured to be 172x more powerful than Vitamin C! How about that?
Not only is it an antioxidant, but it’s an anti-viral and an anti-bacterial and an anti-inflammatory.
I’ll tell you this….ever since I saw the Deep State going after Carbon and trying to tax carbon emissions with their Al-Gore Carbon Tax, I immediately knew one thing: I bet Carbon is actually pretty good for you!
Turns out I was right.
Especially the Carbon-60 “perfect carbon molecule.”
So once I learned more about it, I then set out to find where to buy it from the most reputable company.
I found there are a lot of companies selling C60 that might actually be bad for you and toxic, so I found the one that has the highest standards and safest, most continually-tested product out there….and that was C60 Evo.
I’ve been personally taking C60 for over a year and feel amazing so in light of all the health issues plaguing our nation right now, I decided I’d have one of the founders of the company on my show to break all this down.
Chris Burres was kind enough to speak with me today (on a weekend) and I thought it was a WONDERFUL discussion!
I learned a lot myself….
He explains what C60 is, why its discovery won a Nobel prize, and the benefits many people experience when taking it.
I believe in this product so much after using it for a year I asked the company if I could actually become an affiliate and get all of you a discount….
And they agreed!
So watch the video below and then scroll down to grab my code which will get you 10% if you want to try it.
Watch here on Rumble:

To visit their website go to https://www.c60evo.com/welovetrump/
Use promo code EVNOAH to save 10%.
Backup here on YouTube:

To visit their website go to https://www.c60evo.com/welovetrump/
Use promo code EVNOAH to save 10%.
Want even more on an immune-boosting health plan?
Look no further than my friend Clif High.
Clif has routinely promoted C60 in the past and here is even more of what he recommends.
Take a look:


If that Tweet gets taken down, here is a screenshot of what he posted:

I’m going to give you my disclaimer once again…..
DISCLAIMER: I’m not a doctor and I don’t practice medicine.
And neither is Clif!
Neither of us is giving you medical advice.
Ok?
Ok.
I’m just reporting on what others have said.
But let’s be honest….I think I can probably do better than the “doctors” like Dr. Fraudci, Dr. Birxx who lie to you and serve you up a big heaping pile of propaganda!
You can probably take whatever they tell you to do and just do the opposite and you’d probably be pretty close to an ideal course of action!
So no, I’m not a doctor, but if being a doctor puts you in the same class as Dr. FRAUDci, then I take not being a doctor as a badge of honor.
I’m a reporter.
I simply report what I hear and see from others.
To paraphrase a once great network: I report, you decide!
But what I can report is that it sure looks like some very basic stuff can drastically help you recover and protect your body going forward!
Vitamin C, Vitamin D, Chaga Mushroom Tea, C60, and of course hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin may be highly effective!
If you scroll down, I have links for you.
And let’s consider the worst case scenario…..taking more vitamins is almost never a bad thing, right?
Your body needs them regardless of what virus is floating around out there.
As long as you don’t take too much of the fat-soluble vitamins, it’s almost NEVER a bad thing to give your body more vitamins.
Now let me give you a little more background on Clif and why he’s making these recommendations….
Watch this video where Clif High explains what the spike protein is actually doing to your body, why it is definitely a bio-weapon, and how each of the items listed above can help:
[iframe src=”https://www.bitchute.com/embed/sbls9aO7kys6/” width=”100%” height=”360″]
Here is one more where he goes into even more detail and in this one he talks about the power of C60 and why you need to get some!
Ever since you were a kid, you were told to get your vitamins!
It’s basic advice that was good then and is still good now!
You need large doses of the right kind of Vitamin C, 10-15,000 IU’s of Vitamin D to maintain certain blood levels, and then Clif recommends C60 too.
Watch the interview here from Rumble (they discuss it in the first 10 minutes) and then scroll down for links to where you can get the best of each item:

If you want to follow Clif’s advice, here are some links to the products I like to use.
Unfortunately, I can’t give you a link to NAC on Amazon because Amazon banned it.
One of the oldest and most trusted supplements in the bodybuilding industry and Amazon suddenly banned it right now.
Interesting.
So we go with the rest of the list….
First is Glutathione:

You want to get “Liposomal” Vitamin C, very important.

And in case that sells out, which tends to happen, this is another good Liposomal Vitamin C:

Now on to Vitamin D.
Here is my current favorite and the one I personally take:

And a backup Vitamin D3:

And Chaga Mushroom Tea:

And here is the Zinc Balance:

And we end with C60.
As I mentioned above, I’ve been personally taking C60 for over a year and I have not came down with COVID. Not saying it treats or prevents COVID, I’m just saying my experience.
Regardless of COVID, I love taking it and have noticed multiple benefits.
Here’s what many people have reported:

C60 is a powerful antioxidant (172x the power of Vitamin C), antiviral, antibacterial and anti-inflammatory.

I liked it so much I actually contacted the company and got everyone who is reading this a deal.
The company is called C60Evo.
Go to their website here and then be sure to use promo code EVNOAH and you’ll get 10% off your order!
I love this stuff and I think you will too.
to good health and a big thank you to Clif High for putting out this information!
No, I’m not promising you won’t get COVID, but I am saying that TAKING YOUR VITAMINS and powerful ANTIOXIDANTS is a good idea!
Be smart.
Be safe.
Be healthy!

 

[Apollonian]

Hydroxychloroquine Associated With Lower COVID-19 Mortality: French Study​

BY TYLER DURDEN
FRIDAY, NOV 03, 2023 - 07:40 PM
Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Link: https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/hydroxychloroquine-associated-lower-covid-19-mortality-study/

A pharmacy technician pours out hydroxychloroquine pills at Rock Canyon Pharmacy in Provo, Utah in a file photograph. (George Frey/AFP via Getty Images)
People who received hydroxychloroquine were less likely to die than those who did not, according to a new study.
Just 0.8 percent of patients at a facility in France who received hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and an antibiotic died, compared to 4.8 percent of patients who did not receive the drug combination, French researchers reported on Nov. 1.
"This study represents the largest single-center study evaluating HCQ-AZ in the treatment of COVID-19. Similarly, to other large observational studies, it concludes that HCQ would have saved lives," Dr. Didier Raoult, with Aix-Marseille Universite in Marseille, and his co-authors wrote.
The paper was published in the journal New Microbes and New Infections. It was released as a preprint earlier this year, but withdrawn because authors said they have changed their "analytic strategies."
Researchers examined records from 30,423 patients with COVID-19 who were treated at another institution in Marseille, IHU Méditerranée Infection. They included all adults who tested positive for COVID-19 and who were treated in the hospital as an inpatient or an outpatient between March 2, 2020, and Dec. 31, 2021.
The study set ended up with 30,202 patients because treatment information was not available for the 221 others.
Most of the patients received off-label prescriptions of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin (AZ), a common antibiotic.
Of the set, 23,172 patients received the drug combination. The other 7,030 did not.
Among those who received the drugs, 191, or 0.8 percent, died. Among those who did not, 344, or 4.8 percent, passed away.
Those who received HCQ and AZ were more likely to survive regardless of whether they were inpatients or outpatients.
The biggest effect was recorded in outpatients aged 50 to 89.
Limitations of the study included drawing from records from a single center. Funding came in part from the French government.
HCQ has been cleared in both France and the United States for decades but not for treating COVID-19.
Dr. David Boulware, an infectious disease doctor at the University of Minnesota Medical School, said that clinical trial data do not support using HCQ against the illness.
"Hydroxychloroquine has not been shown to have any benefit in randomized clinical trials," Dr. Boulware, who was not involved in the new study, told The Epoch Times in an email.
"There is zero antiviral effect in humans, and zero reduction in hospitalization among 11 randomized clinical trials pooled together," he added, referring to a metanalysis he co-authored that was published in January. Dr. Boulware also helped carry out a randomized trial examining HCQ as a prophylaxis in people who were exposed to COVID-19, and found it did not prevent illness or confirmed infection.

Mixed Evidence​

Dr. Raoult and his co-authors acknowledged that several large randomized trials have found no benefits for HCQ against COVID-19, including a World Health Organization trial. But they said that the largest, funded by the World Health Organization and and United Kingdom government, suffered from "significant methodological problems," including high dosing during the first 24 hours.
The group also criticized smaller trials with similar findings as underpowered, including a trial in France that was stopped due to enrollment issues.
"In contrast, several large observational retrospective studies published in the literature, including a total of 47,516 patients report a benefit of using HCQ on the mortality of COVID-19 patients," the authors said, pointing to studies from France, Iran, and Spain.
They said the number of patients in the observational studies outweighs the number of patients in the randomized trials and support using HCQ as an early treatment.
Dr. Boulware said that observational data can suffer from serious problems, pointing to a response in 2020 to an observational U.S. paper that reported an association between HCQ with AZ and lower mortality among hospitalized patients.
Dr. Raoult and his co-authors acknowledged the limitations of observational data but lamented what they see as a dearth of clinical trials that use proper dosing.
"Unfortunately, few if any of the RCTs that have attempted to demonstrate the efficacy of HCQ on COVID-19 patients were run with an appropriate methodology," they wrote.
"Inadequate target (late treatment), excessive dosage of the drug, or inappropriate study power were the main troubles. While observational studies have also confounding factors, as discussed above, significant effect estimate differences between RCTs and observational studies are more likely to be linked to the quality of the study than to its design," they added, referencing a Cochrane Review that there was little difference between observational studies and clinical trials.
"In any case, since the epidemic has now vanished, it is no longer possible to conduct RCTs," they concluded. "Only observational studies can bring any more insights to support policy makers with repositioning of hydroxychloroquine in the treatment of COVID-19."
Dr. Raoult was director of the facility at which the patients were seen, but retired in 2022 after a French agency investigation found issues at the facility with regulation compliance. Several of his papers have since been retracted.
Dr. Raoult did not respond to a request for comment.
The new study came about a month after researchers in Belgium reported in another observational study that HCQ with AZ reduced COVID-19 mortality among hospitalized patients.
"Our study suggests that, despite the controversy surrounding its use, treatment with hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin remains a viable option," Dr. Gert Meeus, a nephrologist with AZ Groeninge Hospital, and other researchers wrote.
That group offered similar concerns regarding trials as the French group, including over the dosing levels.
54,306216

MORE COVID-19 STORIES ON ZEROHEDGE​

Certain Scientists, Journals Pose 'Potential Threats To Vaccine Confidence': CDC​

Unraveling The Wuhan Cover-Up: How Fauci Conspired With Virologists To Deceive The Public And Smear Critics​

Watch: Musk Tells Rogan People Were Killed By Ventilators Not COVID-19 Virus​

​

 

[Apollonian]

After bashing it for 3 years and watching millions die, FDA now admits doctors had every right to prescribe Ivermectin as legitimate treatment for Covid-19​

Link: https://leohohmann.com/2023/08/11/a...rmectin-as-legitimate-treatment-for-covid-19/

Just how corrupt is the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Dr. Anthony Fauci and the entire biomedical security state apparatus that peddled fear of Covid and said the only hope of defeating the virus was to wait for a new technologically advanced “vaccine” — the same “vaccine” that proved unsafe and ineffective?
We are talking about a corruption that is beyond the capacity of many Americans to comprehend.

The FDA, Fauci, the CDC, Biden, the entire U.S. medical system and the corporate media mind-controlled millions of Americans into believing that using the well-known anti-microbial drug Ivermectin was a laughingstock perpetuated by quacks and conspiracy theorists.
They kicked to the curb any physician who sought to prescribe Ivermectin to his or her patients infected with Covid. Despite the fact that Ivermectin has been FDA-approved for use in humans for decades, this same deep-state apparatus made it sound like Ivermectin was just a “horse drug” that stupid people were dangerously ingesting in a failed attempt to ward off Covid.
They mocked and derided us. Telling us we were using “horse paste” that was meant solely for livestock, when it was a known fact that Ivermectin, while used to protect equines and bovines from various viral infections, is just as effective in humans.
Now comes the bombshell report we’ve all been waiting for, exposing who the real quacks have been all along, detailing how they suppressed the administering of a well-known, very effective drug during the heat of the Covid pandemic that could have saved millions of lives.
The Epoch Times reports that doctors are now free to prescribe Ivermectin to treat COVID-19, more than two years after millions were killed by doctors listening to advice from Fauci and the FDA to not treat them with a known effective drug.
It all came out this week in litigation against the FDA.
A lawyer representing the FDA said “FDA explicitly recognizes that doctors do have the authority to prescribe Ivermectin to treat COVID.”
That lawyer is Ashley Cheung Honold, a Department of Justice lawyer representing the FDA. She made her comments during oral arguments on August 8 in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit.
The government is defending the FDA’s repeated exhortations to people to not take Ivermectin for COVID-19, including a post on Twitter that said “Stop it.”
Three doctors brought the case against the FDA, alleging the federal agency unlawfully interfered with their practice of medicine with its repeated statements blasting and denigrating the use of Ivermectin to treat Covid patients.
Why did it take this long, you ask? Because a federal judge dismissed the case on December 6, 2022, prompting an appeal.
Jared Kelson, representing the three doctors, told the appeals court:

“The fundamental issue in this case is straightforward. After the FDA approves the human drug for sale, does it then have the authority to interfere with how that drug is used within the doctor-patient relationship? The answer is no.”

The FDA on August 21, 2021, wrote on Twitter:
“You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Seriously, y’all. Stop it.”
The post, which linked to an FDA page that says people shouldn’t use Ivermectin to prevent or treat COVID-19, went viral.
In other statements, the FDA said Ivermectin “isn’t authorized or approved to treat COVID-19” and “Q: Should I take Ivermectin to prevent or treat COVID-19? A: No.”
The plaintiffs are Drs. Paul Marik, Mary Bowden, and Robert Apter. They say they were professionally harmed by the FDA’s statements, including being terminated over efforts to prescribe Ivermectin to patients.
Other doctors were threatened with having their licenses revoked if they prescribed Ivermectin for Covid.
The Epoch Times article cites Dr. Marik, chairman of the Frontline Covid-19 Critical Care Alliance, as noting that a number of studies support using Ivermectin against COVID-19, as the FDA itself has acknowledged.
Federal law enables the FDA to provide information, such as reports of adverse reactions to drugs, but not medical advice, attorney Jared Kelson said.
A version of the drug for animals is available, but Ivermectin is fully approved by the FDA for human use against diseases caused by parasites.
Honold, the FDA lawyer, argued that the FDA didn’t require anyone to do anything or to prohibit anyone from doing anything.
“What about when it said, ‘No, stop it’?” Circuit Judge Jennifer Walker Elrod, on the panel that is hearing the appeal, asked.
“Why, isn’t that a command? If you were in English class, they would say that was a command.”
Honold described the statements as “merely quips.”
So they were just playing with us. They were just making quips, playing with our minds and trying to influence us not to use Ivermectin, but they weren’t “requiring” us to do anything.
Remember that next time you hear anything come out of the FDA, or any government agency for that matter.
Below is just one of the hundreds of corporate media reports mocking Ivermectin as a drug “intended for barnyard animals,” and citing the FDA as the authority warning Americans not to take it.

Fauci’s hands are also full of blood. He was routinely bashing Ivermectin as a viable treatment for Covid during the peak of the pandemic. In an interview with CNN’s Chuck Todd, Fauci also said, “Don’t do it.”
The interview appeared totally staged. Todd phrased the question this way: “Cases are spiking in places like Mississippi and Oklahoma, because some Americans are trying to use an anti-parasite horse drug called Ivermectin to treat coronavirus. What would you tell someone who is considering taking that drug?”
“Don’t do it. There is no evidence whatsoever that that works and it could potentially have toxicity because they’ve taken the drug at a ridiculous dose and wind up getting sick, and there’s no clinical evidence that indicates that this works.”
The reason Fauci, the FDA and the entire mainstream corporate media had to destroy the credibility of Ivermectin was because they had the real toxic drug — mRNA jabs — ready and waiting to be deployed, the one that indeed had “no clinical evidence” of efficacy or safety.
We must also remember that hospitals only received their bonus cash payouts if they used the vaccines and an expensive new drug called Remdesivir, which in many cases led to kidney organ failure. And many states barred pharmacies from filling prescriptions for Ivermectin even when doctors prescribed it.
These were crimes against humanity on a scale the world has never seen.
As a result, millions died.

 

[Apollonian]

FDA Loses its War on Ivermectin: Agrees to Remove All Related Social Media Content and Consumer Advisories on Ivermectin Usage for COVID-19​

By Jim Hᴏft Mar. 22, 2024 8:30 am

Link: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/20...ivermectin-agrees-remove-all/?utm_source=rss/

In December 2021, the FDA warned Americans not to use Ivermectin, which “is intended for animals” to treat or prevent COVID-19.
“Never use medications intended for animals on yourself or other people. Animal ivermectin products are very different from those approved for humans. Use of animal ivermectin for the prevention or treatment of COVID-19 in humans is dangerous,” FDA said at the time.
This was a very controversial statement at the time since the FDA pushed the drug on African migrants back in 2015, and the drug was praised in several scientific journals.

There have now been 101 Ivermectin COVID-19 controlled studies that show a 62% lower risk in early treatment in COVID-19 patients.

New Deals At The Gateway Pundit Discounts Page At MyPillow – Up to 71% Off With Promo Code TGP

A group of brave doctors had filed a federal lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) over the agencies’ unlawful attempts to block the use of ivermectin in treating COVID-19.
The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. Southern District of Texas in Galveston, argues that the FDA has overstepped its authority and unjustifiably interfered with their medical practice.
The plaintiffs, Drs. Mary Talley Bowden, Paul E. Marik, and Robert L. Apter, are contesting the FDA’s portrayal of ivermectin as dangerous for human consumption. They note that the FDA has approved ivermectin for human use since 1996 for a variety of diseases. However, they allege that with the advent of the COVID-19 pandemic, the FDA began releasing documents and social media posts discouraging the use of the anti-viral drug for COVID-19 treatment.

“We’re suing the FDA for lying to the public about ivermectin,” said Dr. Bowden.
Claims were made that the initial article misrepresented the law by stating the FDA’s official stance against Ivermectin use without mentioning that doctors were allowed to administer the medicine.
U.S. law is cited in the complaint, including the provision that the FDA “may not interfere with the authority of a health care provider to prescribe or administer any legally marked device to a patient for any condition or disease within a legitimate health care practitioner-patient relationship.”

On Thursday, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reportedly agreed to remove all its previous social media posts and consumer advisories that specifically addressed the use of ivermectin for the treatment or prevention of COVID-19.
“FDA loses its war on ivermectin and agrees to remove all social media posts and consumer directives regarding ivermectin and COVID, including its most popular tweet in FDA history. This landmark case sets an important precedent in limiting FDA overreach into the doctor-patient relationship,” Dr. Bowden wrote on her social media.
The plaintiffs have recently received the signed court order and are preparing to issue a press release about it later today.

The Gateway Pundit previously reported that during a hearing, the agency’s lawyers argued that the FDA was only giving advice and it was not mandatory when it told people to “stop” taking Ivermectin for COVID-19.
“The cited statements were not directives,” said Isaac Belfer, one of the lawyers. “They were not mandatory. They were recommendations. They said what parties should do. They said, for example, why you should not take ivermectin to treat COVID-19. They did not say you may not do it, you must not do it. They did not say it’s prohibited or it’s unlawful. They also did not say that doctors may not prescribe ivermectin.”
“They use informal language, that is true… It’s conversational but not mandatory,” he continued.

However, the statement from the lawyer contradicted the FDA’s social media post, stating, “You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Seriously, y’all. Stop it,” and another tweet says, “Hold your horses, y’all. Ivermectin may be trending, but it still isn’t authorized or approved to treat COVID-19.”
Both tweets displayed the title of “Why You Should Not Use Ivermectin to Treat or Prevent COVID-19” and included a link to that publication.
Trending: JUST IN…President Trump: “I currently have almost $500 Million in CASH” For Bail….Liberal Heads Are About to Explode


Last year, Doctors Mary Talley Bowden, Paul Marik, & Robert Apter appeared in the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals as part of their lawsuit.

“The FDA is not your doctor. Yesterday we took them to court to remind them of that,” Dr. Bowden wrote.
“A pharmacist cites CDC and US FDA as why she will continue to deny filling prescriptions for ivermectin. On Tuesday, the FDA’s attorney declared the FDA has no problem with doctors prescribing ivermectin off-label. It’s time for them to make a formal announcement and set the record straight,” Bowden wrote on Thursday.
During the oral argument, Ashley Cheung Honold, a Department of Justice lawyer representing the FDA stated that the agency “explicitly recognizes” that doctors do have the authority to administer ivermectin to treat COVID.

“”FDA explicitly recognizes that doctors do have the authority to prescribe ivermectin to treat COVID,” said Honold.
“FDA made these statements in response to multiple reports of consumers being hospitalized, after self-medicating with ivermectin intended for horses, which is available for purchase over the counter without the need for prescription,” Honold said.
“In some contexts, those words could be construed as a command,” Ms. Honold said. “But in this context, where FDA was simply using these words in the context of a quippy tweet meant to share its informational article, those statements do not rise to the level of a command.”

“FDA is clearly acknowledging that doctors have the authority to prescribe human ivermectin to treat COVID. So they are not interfering with the authority of doctors to prescribe drugs or to practice medicine,” she said.
It can be recalled that Houston Methodist launched an investigation into Bowden and suspended her for defying health authorities and exercising free speech.
The hospital excoriated Bowden for “using her social media accounts to express her personal opinions about the COVID-19 vaccine and treatments,” NBC News reports. The suspension barred the physician from admitting or treating patients at the hospital.

Bowden repeatedly warned that it is “wrong” to mandate the experimental mRNA vaccines and continuously touted Ivermectin as a safe and effective treatment amid threats from public health officials against prescribing the drug.
Bowden was forced to resign. In her resignation letter, Bowden doubled down on the efficacy of Ivermectin.
“I have worked hard to provide early treatment for victims of COVID-19. My efforts have been successful. I have treated more than 200 COVID-19 patients, including many with co-morbidities, and none of these patients have required hospitalization. This is a testament to the success of my treatment methods,” she wrote. “Throughout this pandemic, there has been no FDA-approved treatment for COVID. Therefore I have done my best to care for patients and save lives in the absence of a clear scientific consensus.”
“Early treatment must still be part of any strategy for patient care. That is why physicians and hospitals should pay more attention to medications such as Ivermectin, which significant research and my clinical experience indicate is effective,” she continued. “I have decided to part ways with Houston Methodist because of the accusation that I have been spreading “dangerous information.” This is false and defamatory. I do not spread misinformation, and my opinions are supported by science. There is substantial evidence for the efficacy of Ivermectin in treating COVID-19, and no evidence for serious or fatal side effects associated with the doses used to treat COVID-19.”

 

[Apollonian]

FDA settles ivermectin lawsuit, agrees to delete posts discouraging its use against COVID-19

03/26/2024 // Ava Grace

Link: https://www.naturalnews.com/2024-03...t-deletes-posts-discouraging-ivermectin.html/

[see vid at site link, above]

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has agreed to remove social media posts and web pages discouraging the use of ivermectin to treat Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) infection as part of a lawsuit settlement.

The FDA, which denied any wrongdoing, said it will remove content warning people not to use ivermectin to treat COVID-19 within 21 days. The move came as a condition of a settlement dated March 21, according to the Epoch Times. In exchange, doctors who sued the regulator will no longer pursue further legal action and will dismiss their claims.

Among the posts the agency will remove as part of the settlement include a March 5, 2021 consumer update titled "Why You Should Not Use Ivermectin to Treat or Prevent COVID-19." The said post contained pictures of a doctor and a horse, a nod to the antiviral being smeared as a "horse dewormer."

Also included in the content to be removed is a post on X (formerly Twitter) that discouraged the use of ivermectin against COVID-19. "You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Seriously, y’all. Stop it," the aforementioned post stated.

Previously, the FDA removed a page that also advised the public against taking "ivermectin to prevent or treat COVID-19." It explained: "The FDA has not authorized or approved ivermectin for use in preventing or treating COVID-19 in humans or animals." It also falsely mentioned that data do not show ivermectin is effective against COVID-19, despite how some studies it cites show ivermectin is effective against the illness. (Related: Ivermectin helped people RECOVER FASTER from COVID-19 infections, study finds.)

Human knowledge is under attack! Governments and powerful corporations are using censorship to wipe out humanity's knowledge base about nutrition, herbs, self-reliance, natural immunity, food production, preparedness and much more. We are preserving human knowledge using AI technology while building the infrastructure of human freedom. Learn about our free, non-commercial AI / LLM project here. Support our efforts to build the infrastructure of human freedom by shopping at HealthRangerStore.com, featuring lab-tested, certified organic, non-GMO foods and nutritional solutions.

In an email, an FDA spokesperson explained that the agency "has chosen to resolve this lawsuit rather than continuing to litigate over statements that are between two and nearly four years old." They also reiterated that the FDA "has not changed its position" about ivermectin's use against COVID-19, stressing that it hasn't approved the antiviral drug for that purpose.

FDA smearing ivermectin despite approving it​

According to Children's Health Defense, the plaintiffs involved in the case called the March 21 settlement a big win for patients and the patient-physician relationship.

"This landmark case sets an important precedent in limiting FDA overreach into the doctor-patient relationship," said plaintiff Dr. Mary Talley Bowden in a statement. "FDA loses its war on ivermectin and agrees to remove all social media posts and consumer directives regarding ivermectin and COVID-19, including its most popular tweet in FDA history."

Co-plaintiff Dr. Paul Marik, also the president and chief scientific officer of the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance, lauded the settlement. He said: "We are extremely pleased with the outcome of the settlement, as it is a victory for every doctor and patient in the United States."

"The FDA interfered in the practice of medicine with [its] irresponsible language and posts about ivermectin. We will never know how many lives were affected because patients were denied access to a lifesaving treatment, because their doctor was 'just following the FDA.'"

The regulator first approved ivermectin in 1996 to treat several conditions, including river blindness. Doctors in the U.S. commonly prescribe medicines off-label, i.e. for a different purpose than the ones they were usually approved. Some doctors did exactly that during the COVID-19 pandemic, prescribing ivermectin against SARS-CoV-2 infection.

The FDA then ramped up its anti-ivermectin campaign – leading to Bowden, Marik and co-plaintiff Dr. Robert Apter taking the regulator to court in 2022. According to the plaintiffs' lawsuit, they suffered repercussions after prescribing ivermectin to patients with COVID-19 because of the FDA's campaign to smear the antiviral drug.

U.S. District Judge Jeffrey Brown of the District Court for the Southern District of Texas dismissed the case in the same year it was filed. But a three-judge panel at the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned Brown's decision in 2023. The appeals court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, explaining that the FDA wasn't authorized under existing law to give medical advice.

Visit FDA.news for more stories about the regulator.

Watch the Swedish Rebel discuss ivermectin, the "wonder medicine" Big Pharma hates.


This video is from the Swedish Rebel channel on Brighteon.com.

More related stories:​

Comprehensive review highlights key adverse events linked to COVID-19 vaccines.

FDA now admits doctors can prescribe IVERMECTIN to treat COVID-19.

WHY ONLY NOW? FDA rules that doctors can now prescribe ivermectin for COVID-19.

People who were given ivermectin for COVID-19 recovered significantly faster than others, study shows.

Dr. Bowden: Pharmacists still refusing to fill ivermectin prescriptions for COVID-19 despite FDA backpedaling.

Sources include:

TheEpochTimes.com

Brighteon.com

 

[Apollonian]

FDA just lost a historic ivermectin lawsuit — so when will FDA officials be arrested and charged with manslaughter for denying lifesaving treatments to Americans?

03/29/2024 // Lance D Johnson

Link: https://www.naturalnews.com/2024-03-29-fda-lost-historic-ivermectin-lawsuit.html/

During the covid-19 scandal, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) routinely interfered in the doctor-patient relationship, withheld life-saving information and suppressed efficacious treatments for covid-19 and other respiratory illnesses. In misleading the public, the FDA placed pressure on medical boards and waged war against doctors who effectively treated their patients for covid-19. One of the treatments prescribed by doctors – but demonized by the FDA – was ivermectin.

Texas court cracks down on FDA and HHS officials​

In a historic case, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Galveston Division ruled against the FDA and struck down their war against ivermectin. As part of the settlement, the FDA agrees to take down website and social media posts that warn people not to use ivermectin to treat COVID-19. The defendants in the suit include U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra and Dr. Robert Califf, acting FDA commissioner.

Dr. Mary Talley Bowden, Dr. Paul Marik and Dr. Robert Apter – three American heroes who fought back against the FDA’s bullying and censorship – proved to the court that the FDA acted outside of its authority. They were represented by Boyden, Gray & Associates.

Bowden, Marik and Apter proved that the FDA “unlawfully interfered” with doctors' ability to practice medicine. The FDA directed the public, including health professionals and patients, not to use ivermectin – even though the medication is approved for human use by the FDA.

Thanks to your generous support, we are building the infrastructure of human freedom and actively donating our technology to independent publishers, authors and home schooling organizations. Learn about our game-changing non-commercial AI project here. Support our ongoing efforts to preserve and enhance human knowledge by shopping at HealthRangerStore.com.

The ruling stops the FDA from acting as the ultimate authority over all doctors and medical professionals in the nation. FDA officials share a sleazy relationship with the pharmaceutical industry and favored certain drugs as a one-size-fits-all mandate for the entire medical system.

With this ruling, the FDA is no longer allowed to ban off-label use of particular drugs like ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine. The agency is no longer allowed to advise patients to take approved drugs. The FDA should have listened to medical professionals who worked meticulously and tirelessly to treat covid-19 patients. Instead, the agency went to war against them and mocked and/or blacklisted their treatment protocols.

Will FDA officials be charged for manslaughter?​

In 2022, U.S. District Judge Jeffrey Brown dismissed the case, claiming that the FDA has “sovereign immunity” that protects them from civil lawsuits. When the case got to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans, the verdict was overturned. The September 2023 ruling confirmed that the FDA did exceed its authority under federal law. The ruling states that the FDA is “not a physician.” While the agency “can inform,” it has “no authority” to recommend that consumers “stop taking medicine.”

Marik said the ruling, “is a major win because it’s saying that the FDA can approve drugs, but they can’t interfere with the patient-physician relationship.” “They can’t determine … what drugs physicians can and cannot prescribe,” he added.

Because of the FDA’s war on ivermectin, doctors lost their licensees, pharmacies refused to dispense ivermectin and immune-compromised patients were left with no efficacious treatment plan.

The FDA’s suppression of efficacious treatments and further acts of censorship and malice were ultimately used to expedite the emergency use authorization of covid-19 “vaccines.” In fact, in order for “emergency use authorization” to be enacted, there had to be no available treatments for the target infectious disease. The FDA played a critical role in favoring specific drugs and forcing untested and ineffective mRNA experiments onto the population.

With this ruling, the “pandemic” curtain is peeled back. Censoring treatments, separating families, isolating patients and forcing covid-positive patients onto remdesivir, sedation and mechanical ventilation has been revealed as a fraudulent protocol of mass medical error and wrongful death.

Now, will FDA officials be charged for manslaughter?

Sources include:

ChildrensHealthDefense.org

ChildrensHealthDefense.org [PDF]

NaturalNews.com

NaturalNews.com

 

[Apollonian]

IVERMECTIN and CANCER Part 2 - Treating Turbo Cancer - 7 new studies released in 2024 show Ivermectin works against CANCER - suggested PROTOCOLS for COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Induced Turbo Cancers​

2ND SMARTEST GUY IN THE WORLD
APR 07, 2024

Link: https://www.2ndsmartestguyintheworld.com/p/ivermectin-and-cancer-part-2-treating/

by DR. WILLIAM MAKIS MD​

Last year I published one of the most popular articles on Ivermectin and Cancer Treatment ever published, which went viral internationally:
​

(Oct.2, 2023) - IVERMECTIN and CANCER, it has at least 15 anti-cancer mechanisms of action. Can Ivermectin Treat COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Induced Turbo Cancers? - 9 Ivermectin papers reviewed
​

2024 - NEW STUDIES!
​

• (2024 Fan et al) - Ivermectin Inhibits Bladder Cancer Cell Growth and Induces Oxidative Stress and DNA Damage
• (2024 Man-Yuan Li et al) - Ivermectin induces nonprotective autophagy by downregulating PAK1 and apoptosis in lung adenocarcinoma cells
• (2024 Kaur et al) - Ivermectin: A Multifaceted drug with a potential beyond anti-parasitic therapy
• (2024 Xing Hu et al) - Ivermectin as a potential therapeutic strategy for glioma
• (2024 Yang Song et al) - Gene signatures to therapeutics: Assessing the potential of ivermectin against t(4;14) multiple myeloma
• (2024 Goldfarb et al) - Lipid-Restricted Culture Media Reveal Unexpected Cancer Cell Sensitivities
• (2024 Newell et al) - Therapeutic targeting of nuclear export and import receptors in cancer and their potential in combination chemotherapy

PRACTICAL APPROACH TO USING IVERMECTIN IN CANCER TREATMENT (Disclaimer: the following is not medical advice)
​

In “Ivermectin and Cancer Part 1”, I covered all the mechanisms of action that Ivermectin has shown against cancer in many in vitro and in vivo studies.
The 7 new studies published in 2024 only confirm what we already know from previous studies. Ivermectin is highly effective against many cancers.
Since my previous Ivermectin article, I‘ve had 1000s of questions sent to me. Not about mechanisms of action against Cancer. But about practical use - how to use Ivermectin to treat Stage 4 Cancers, what formulations, what doses?
The goal of this article (Part 2) is to answer all of those questions to the best of my ability.

Papers reviewed:
​

• 2023 Sep.23 - Man-Yuan Li et al - Ivermectin induces nonprotective autophagy by downregulating PAK1 and apoptosis in lung adenocarcinoma cells
• 2023 May - Samy et al - Eprinomectin: a derivative of ivermectin suppresses growth and metastatic phenotypes of prostate cancer cells by targeting the β-catenin signaling pathway
• 2022 Nov - Lotfalizadeh et al - The Anticancer potential of Ivermectin: Mechanisms of action and therapeutic implications
• 2022 Oct - Jian Liu et al - Progress in Understanding the Molecular Mechanisms Underlying the Antitumour Effects of Ivermectin
• 2022 Jun - Daeun Lee et al - Ivermectin suppresses pancreatic cancer via mitochondria dysfunction
• 2021 Aug - Shican Zhou et al - Ivermectin has New Application in Inhibiting Colorectal Cancer Cell Growth
• 2021 Jan - Mingyang Tang et al - Ivermectin, a potential anticancer drug derived from an antiparasitic drug
• 2019 Sep Intuyod et al - Anti-parasitic Drug Ivermectin Exhibits Potent Anticancer Activity Against Gemcitabine-resistant Cholangiocarcinoma In Vitro
• 2018 Feb - Juarez et al - The multitargeted drug ivermectin: from an antiparasitic agent to a repositioned cancer drug

2018 Feb - Juarez et al - The multitargeted drug ivermectin: from an antiparasitic agent to a repositioned cancer drug
​

• Satoshi Omura at the Kitasato Institute discovered Ivermectin in 1979 and was awarded a Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for this discovery in 2015
• Ivermectin was FDA Approved for human use in 1987 to orally treat onchocerciasis, also known as river blindness, caused by the blackfly-transmitted parasite Onchocerca volvulus
• Ivermectin is annually taken by close to 250 million people
• most patients treated with Ivermectin have no side-effects other than those caused by the immune and inflammatory responses against the parasite, such as fever, pruritus, skin rashes and malaise
• maximum concentration in plasma is reached 4-5 h after its oral administration
• its half-life is approximately 19 h and is metabolized in the liver by the cytochrome CYP1A and CYP3A4 complexes, generating 10 metabolites, mostly demethylated and hydroxylated.
• Its excretion is mainly by feces and only 1% is excreted in the urine
• Ivermectin exerts antitumor effects in different types of cancer.

What this means Clinically:
​

• Chloride channel - Acute myeloid leukemia - induced cell death
• Akt/mTOR path - glioblastoma, renal cancer cell lines - inhibition of mitochondrial biogenesis or function, oxidative stress, DNA damage
• P2X7 (ICD) overexpression promotes tumor growth and metastases - ivermectin potentiates immunogenic cell death (ICD) in triple negative breast cancer cells
• PAK1 (Autophagy) - glioblastoma and ovarian cancer cell lines - Ivermectin promotes autophagy through this pathway
• WNT-TCF pathway - glioblastoma, colon cancer, melanoma - Ivermectin exerts anti-proliferative function through this pathway (possibilities to use Ivermectin to block WNT-TCF dependent cancers like breast, skin, lung)
• SIN3 Domain - breast cancer (Ivermectin acts as epigenetic modulator to alter gene expression and decrease tumor growth)
• NS3 helicase - glioma cells - Ivermectin had anti-tumor effects by acting as helicase inhibitor

In Vitro Studies:
​

• breast cancer, ovarian, prostate, colon, pancreas, head and neck, melanoma - inhibits cell proliferation, induction of apoptosis, autophagy, reversion of tamoxifen resistance, inhibits metastases
• glioblastoma - growth inhibition, apoptosis, and anti-angiogenesis

In Vivo Studies (done on immune deficient mice):
​

• acute myeloblastic leukemia - reduce tumor volume up to 70%
• glioblastoma - reduce tumor volume up to 50%
• breast cancer - reduce tumor volume up to 60%
• glioma - reduce tumor volume up to 50% (at 0.24mg/kg), however at human dose equivalent to 0.8mg/kg tumors were not detectable!
• colon cancer - reduce tumor volume up to 85%
• median dose employed was equivalent to 0.4 mg/kg in humans from 10 to 42 days (oral, intraperitoneal or intra-tumoral)
• the in vitro and in vivo antitumor activities of Ivermectin are achieved at concentrations that can be clinically reachable based on the human pharmacokinetic studies done in healthy and parasited patients

2019 Sep Intuyod et al - Anti-parasitic Drug Ivermectin Exhibits Potent Anticancer Activity Against Gemcitabine-resistant Cholangiocarcinoma In Vitro
​

• Ivermectin studied on cholangiocarcinoma cells that were chemo resistant (gemcitabine)
• Ivermectin inhibited cancer cell proliferation and colony formation in a dose and time dependent manner(!)
• Ivermectin caused S-phase cell cycle arrest and cell death
• Conclusion: “Ivermectin might be useful as an alternative treatment for cholangiocarcinoma, especially in patients who do not respond to chemo.”

2021 Jan - Mingyang Tang et al - Ivermectin, a potential anticancer drug derived from an antiparasitic drug
​

• specific mechanism of IVM-mediated cytotoxicity in tumor cells is unclear; it may be related to the effect of IVM on various signaling pathways
• IVM seems to induce mixed cell death in tumor cells

• CONCLUSIONS: Ivermectin selectively inhibits the proliferation of tumors at a dose that is not toxic to normal cells and can reverse the MDR (multi-drug resistance) of tumors.
• In healthy volunteers, the dose was increased to 2 mg/kg, and no serious adverse reactions were found
• Unfortunately, there have been no reports of clinical trials of IVM as an anticancer drug
• large number of research results indicate that IVM affects multiple signaling pathways in tumor cells and inhibits proliferation, IVM may cause antitumor activity in tumor cells through specific targets
• Ivermectin regulates the tumor microenvironment, inhibits the activity of tumor stem cells and reduces tumor angiogenesis and tumor metastasis.
• It has become increasingly clear that Ivermectin can induce a mixed cell death mode involving apoptosis, autophagy and pyroptosis depending on the cell conditions and cancer type.
• Ivermectin can enhance the sensitivity of chemotherapeutic drugs and reduce the production of resistance. Therefore, IVM should be used in combination with other drugs to achieve the best effect

2022 Jun - Daeun Lee et al - Ivermectin suppresses pancreatic cancer via mitochondria dysfunction
​

• Poster presentation from South Korea
• Ivermectin was combined with gemcitabine in pancreatic cancer
• Ivermectin-gemcitabine combination inhibited pancreatic cancer cell proliferation via G1 arrest of cell cycle
• in vivo experiments showed ivermectin-gemcitabine significantly suppressed tumor growth of pancreatic cancer compared with gemcitabine alone
• Conclusion: “Ivermectin could be a potential antitumor drug for the treatment of pancreatic cancer”

2021 Aug - Shican Zhou et al - Ivermectin has New Application in Inhibiting Colorectal Cancer Cell Growth
​

• Colorectal cancer is 3rd most common cancer worldwide, lacks effective therapy
• Ivermectin tested on colorectal cancer cell lines
• Ivermectin dose-dependently inhibited colorectal cancer growth
  • promoted cell apoptosis
  • promoted total and mitochondrial ROS production (reactive oxygen species)
  • induced colorectal cancer cell S-phase arrest
• Conclusion: Ivermectin might be a new potential anticancer drug therapy for human colorectal cancer

2022 Oct - Jian Liu et al - Progress in Understanding the Molecular Mechanisms Underlying the Antitumor Effects of Ivermectin
​

• PAK1 (Autophagy) - Ivermectin, acts as PAK1 inhibitor and inhibits growth of breast cancer, ovarian cancer, glioblastoma and NF2 tumors and involved in cell death in Nasopharyngeal carcinoma and melanoma.
• Apoptosis (Caspase Dependent) - Ivermectin induces apoptosis in glioblastoma, chronic myeloid leukemia cells, also breast cancer, ovarian cancer.
• Immunogenic Cell Death (ICD - P2X7 signaling) - ivermectin induces cell death in triple negative breast cancer.
• YAP1 Inhibition - hepatocellular and cholangiocarcinoma, colorectal cancer, ovarian cancer, gastric cancer - ivermectin exerts anti-tumor effects
• WNT Path (cancer progression - differentiation, metastasis, cell senescence, tumor initiation, tumor growth) - Ivermectin inhibits this path - inhibits colon cancer and lung cancer, ivermectin also limits formation of cancer stem cells.
• TF3 Path - ivermectin stimulates apoptosis of melanoma cells.
• RNA Helicase Inhibition - ivermectin inhibits cell invasion and proliferation of glioma cells
• SID Peptide (SIN3A/B) - Ivermectin inhibits breast cancer progression, also restores tamoxifen sensitivity
• Akt/mTOR inhibition - Ivermectin inhibits mitochondrial respiration - glioblastoma, CML leukemia (some cancers like breast, leukemia and lymphoma are more metabolically active and depended on mitochondria - more responsive to ivermectin inhibition)
• ivermectin is an angiogenesis inhibitor
• ivermectin has anti-mitotic activity

In humans, toxicity of ivermectin is very low, no serious adverse reactions have been found in healthy volunteers at dose up to 120 mg (~2 mg/kg) (Reference: GuzzoCA, FurtekCI, PorrasAG, et al. Safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of escalating high doses of ivermectin in healthy adult subjects. J Clin Pharmacol. 2002;42(10):1122–1133.)

2023 May - Samy et al - Eprinomectin: a derivative of ivermectin suppresses growth and metastatic phenotypes of prostate cancer cells by targeting the β-catenin signaling pathway
​

• Ivermectin (derivative) inhibits prostate cancer cell viability, migration capacities
• Ivermectin induces apoptosis, autophagy (via ROS)
• Ivermectin downregulates expression of cancer stem cell markers
• Conclusion: Ivermectin has tremendous potential to target metastatic prostate cancer cells and provides new avenues for therapeutic approaches to advanced prostate cancer

2023 Sep.23 - Man-Yuan Li et al - Ivermectin induces nonprotective autophagy by downregulating PAK1 and apoptosis in lung adenocarcinoma cells
​

• Ivermectin was studied on lung adenocarcinoma cells
• Ivermectin strikingly impeded colony formation and viability of cancer cells, along with cell proliferation, caused apoptosis and enhanced autophagy
• Ivermectin efficiently suppressed cellular growth of lung adenocarcinoma cells in vivo among nude mice

My Take…
​

Ivermectin exerts anti-cancer effects through at least 15 different pathways proven in the medical literature, both in vitro and in vivo!
(You get a nice summary of these 15 pathways from the 2021 paper by Mingyang Tang et al.)

First, let’s quickly summarize the anti-cancer mechanisms (a quick summary can be found in 2022 paper by Loftalizadeh et al):
​

• Ivermectin induces tumor cell death: apoptosis, autophagy, pyroptosis
• Ivermectin inhibits tumor initiation and tumor progression (via WNT inhibition, YAP1 inhibition)
• Ivermectin inhibits tumor growth and proliferation (via Akt/mTOR inhibition, MAPK inhibition)
• Ivermectin stops cancer cell migration, invasion and metastasis (via PAK1 inhibition - seen in 70% of all cancers, EMT inhibition, RNA Helicase inhibition)
• Ivermectin causes cancer cell mitochondrial dysfunction (inhibits mitochondrial biogenesis, increases reactive oxygen species selectively only in cancer cells)
• Ivermectin regulates tumor microenvironment (to inhibit tumor growth and progression, via P2X7 path, ICD - mediates immunogenic cell death)
• Ivermectin inhibits cancer stem cells (which are responsible for tumor initiation, progression and recurrence)
• Ivermectin inhibits tumor angiogenesis (tumor blood vessel creation)
• Ivermectin has anti-mitotic activity (interacts with mammalian tubulin)
• Ivermectin is an epigenetic regulator of cancer to inhibit cancer progression (alters gene expression to inhibit cancer progression, SIN3A, EMT)
• Ivermectin can overcome tumor multidrug resistance

What cancers can Ivermectin treat?
​

• The top 5 COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Induced Turbo Cancers are: lymphomas, brain cancers, breast cancers, colon cancers and lung cancers (signals also seen in leukemias, hepatobiliary cancers, testicular cancers, sarcomas and melanomas)
• Ivermectin has been shown to kill these cancer cells (in vitro or in vivo):
• breast cancer, especially triple negative breast cancer which is often seen in COVID-19 mRNA Vaccinated women and has the worst prognosis.
• glioblastoma and gliomas (glioblastomas are often seen in COVID-19 mRNA Vaccinated individuals)
• leukemias, both AML and CML (these are the most aggressive and quickly lethal mRNA Turbo Cancers)
• colorectal cancer (Stage 4 Colon cancers common in COVID-19 mRNA vaccinated)
• hepatobiliary cancers: hepatocecullar carcinoma, cholangiocarcinoma, pancreatic cancer (major signal with COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines)
• lung cancer (Stage 4 lung cancers in COVID-19 mRNA Vaccinated)
• melanoma (definite signal in COVID-19 mRNA vaccinated)
• renal cell cancer (possible signal with mRNA Turbo Cancers) and urothelial carcinoma
• ovarian cancer (possible signal with mRNA Turbo Cancers)
• gastric cancer
• prostate cancer (possible signal with mRNA Turbo Cancers)
• Nasopharyngeal cancer

There is almost no literature on Ivermectin and lymphomas which are probably the most common COVID-19 mRNA vaccine turbo cancers - this must be investigated.

What dose of Ivermectin to treat COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Turbo Cancer?
​

• Guzzo et al published a paper in 2022 on the “Safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of escalating high doses of Ivermectin in healthy adult subjects”
• The highest dose tested to be safe with no side effects, was 2 mg/kg.
• Max concentration in plasma is 4 hours after oral intake
• Half life is 18 hours
• Dr.David E. Scheim PhD, Blacksburg VA also wrote an interesting article on Ivermectin Safety in Sep.7, 2021 (Source)
• Several studies have shown that Ivermectin’s anti-cancer effects are DOSE-DEPENDENT (higher dose = better response)

Warning: not to be taken as medical advice - hypothetical situation: if I was faced with a COVID-19 Vaccine Induced Turbo Cancer or an advanced stage cancer, I would be looking at an Ivermectin dose of 2mg/kg orally, daily or every two days.
​

Dr. Justus Hope MD published an article on Aug.29, 2023 that discusses anecdotal cases of Stage 4 Colon cancer, Stage 4 Ovarian Cancer responding to Ivermectin with dramatic drop in Tumor markers.
​

High-dose Ivermectin shrinks cancer metastases
​

Justus R. Hope MD
Recently I reported on a case of Stage IV Colon Cancer that appeared hopeless. The gentleman, Rick, had widespre...
Also mentioned is a “High Dose Ivermectin” regimen of 2mg/kg per day for a doctor with Stage 4 Gallbladder cancer, taken for over a year, with visual side effects for a few days initially which resolved.
Also described is a case of enlarged Prostate suspicious for cancer, and a 5 week Ivermectin 45mg/day regimen that dropped PSA from 89.1 to 10.9 with resolution of nocturnal urinary frequency. For a 100kg man, that is a dose of 0.45mg/kg, significantly lower than the 2 mg/kg safe dose published by Guzzo et al.
The article describes a cancer patient with a neck tumor and lung metastases on a High Dose Ivermectin regimen of 2.45mg/kg daily.

I believe that it is a reasonable hypothesis that COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Turbo Cancer patients could benefit from High Dose Ivermectin regimens, such as 2mg/kg and we urgently need more research to be done in this area.
​

(mRNA Vaccine Induced Turbo Cancers such as leukemias, glioblastomas, breast cancers (including triple negative), colon cancers, hepatobiliary cancers, lung cancers, melanomas, renal cell cancers, ovarian cancers, prostate cancers - as there is already evidence in the literature)
​

---

Based on the above information, if one were afflicted with “vaccine” induced turbo cancer, then one could greatly increase the Ivermectin dose (i.e. 2mg/kg) in the below treatment, as well as double or even quadruple the Fenbendazole dose with no toxicity whatsoever:

New & Improved Joe Tippens Protocol​

• Tocotrienol and Tocopherol forms (all 8) of Vitamin E (400-800mg per day, 7 days a week). A product called Gamma E by Life Extension or Perfect E are both great.
• Bio-Available Curcumin (600mg per day, 2 pills per day 7 days a week). A product called Theracurmin HP by Integrative Therapeutics is bioavailable.
• CBD oil (1-2 droppers full [equal to 25mg per day] under the tongue, 7 days a week) https://www.soothingsolutionscbd.com/product/3500mg-full-spectrum-cbd-tincture/ (Please use code 2SGPET for 10% off on this full spectrum CBD oil.)
• Fenbendazole (300mg, 7 days a week).
• Ivermectin (24mg, 7 days a week).
• Removing sugars and carbohydrates from one’s diet is crucial during this protocol.

They want you dead.
Do NOT comply.

 

[Apollonian]

Unmasking the Hidden Dangers: How mRNA C-19 Vaccines Can Compromise Your Immune System & Essentially Cause “VAIDS”​

BY THE EXPOSÉ ON APRIL 11, 2024

Link: https://expose-news.com/2024/04/11/...romise-immune-system-essentially-cause-vaids/

The COVID-19 pandemic led to an unprecedented global effort to develop and distribute vaccines. One of the most controversial technologies in the race was mRNA vaccination, which Pfizer and Moderna claimed showed high efficacy in preventing severe COVID-19 infections.
However, grave concerns have been raised since their roll-out and were also raised before their rollout regarding the potential impact of mRNA vaccines on the immune system.
In this article, we will discuss the mRNA vaccination process, its deadly side effects, and the damage it can cause to the general immune system.

---

mRNA Vaccination: The Basics​

Messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines are a new class of “vaccines” (gene therapy) that are supposed to invade our cells and teach them how to make a protein that triggers an immune response. This immune response, which produces antibodies, is allegedly what protects us from getting infected if the real virus enters our bodies.
mRNA vaccines are different from traditional vaccines. Firstly because they aren’t vaccines, they’re gene therapy and were never before authorised to be given to humans on a mass scale until the FDA, MHRA, EMA etc. granted Emergency Use Authorisation (EUA) to the COVID-19 mRNA jabs.
Secondly, they are different because they do not use a live or weakened virus to stimulate an immune response. Instead, they use a small piece of genetic material, called mRNA, which encodes the instructions for the production of a specific viral protein.
The mRNA is encased in a protective lipid nanoparticle that helps deliver the genetic material into our cells. Once inside the cell, the mRNA is translated into the viral protein, which is then presented on the cell’s surface. This presentation of the viral protein prompts the immune system to recognize it as foreign and produce antibodies to neutralize it.
Now you can see why they are actually gene therapy injections.

Potential Side Effects of mRNA Vaccination​

Like any vaccine, mRNA vaccines can cause serious side effects. Authorities claim these side effects are generally mild and temporary, such as pain at the injection site, fatigue, headache, muscle pain, and fever but they’re not telling the truth. In realiy, more severe side effects, such as anaphylaxis, myocarditis/pericarditis, severe heart disease, cancer, blindness, brain bleeds, and a whole range of other dangerous consequences have been reported.

Potential Risks to the Immune System​

1. Overstimulation of the immune system:
   
   The mRNA in the vaccine encodes for the production of a specific viral protein, which can trigger an immune response. In some cases, the immune system may become overstimulated, leading to inflammation or autoimmune reactions. However, this risk is generally considered low, as the mRNA in the vaccine is quickly degraded and eliminated by the body.

In-Depth Explanation:

The immune system is designed to recognize and eliminate foreign substances, such as viruses and bacteria. When a pathogen enters the body, the immune system mounts a response to neutralize and remove it. In the case of mRNA vaccination, the immune system is exposed to a small piece of genetic material that encodes for a specific viral protein. This exposure can trigger an immune response, leading to the production of antibodies that recognize and neutralize the viral protein.
While this immune response is essential for protection against the virus, there is a concern that the vaccine could overstimulate the immune system, leading to inflammation or autoimmune reactions. Inflammation is a natural part of the immune response, but excessive inflammation can cause damage to healthy tissues and organs.

Similarly, autoimmune reactions occur when the immune system mistakenly targets the body’s own cells and tissues, leading to chronic inflammation and tissue damage.
Authorities claim that the mRNA in the vaccine is quickly degraded and eliminated by the body, minimizing the duration of exposure to the viral protein. However, this isn’t true in most cases.

Clinical trials had only reached phase 3 when health authorities worldwide granted EUA to the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines and real-world data shows a significantly increased mortality rate among the vaccinated compared to the unvaccinated, as well as a much higher risk of infection compared to the unvaccinated, suggesting an increases risk of autoimmune diseases or chronic inflammation in people who have received mRNA vaccines.
The UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) published a weekly Vaccine Surveillance Report, each report contained four weeks’ worth of data on Covid-19 cases, hospitalisations, and deaths by vaccination status.
Here are the COVID-19 case-rates per 100,000 by vaccination status for each age group over the age of 18 in England, plus the average case rate per 100,000 for all adults in England taken from the UKHSA Vaccine Surveillance Report – Week 5 – 2022 –

Using Pfizer’s vaccine effectiveness formula we can work out the real-world vaccine effectiveness –
Here’s how effective the Covid-19 vaccines were proving to be in each double-vaccinated age group –

The lowest COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness was seen in the 40-49 age group in England throughout January 2022, recorded at minus-209.4%, with the 50-59 age group not far behind.
But Vaccine effectiveness isn’t really a measure of a vaccine, it is a measure of a vaccine recipient’s immune system performance compared to the immune system performance of an unvaccinated person.
Therefore, the UKHSA data shows that the COVID-19 injections are decimating the natural immune system.
Then we also have the increased mortality rates among the vaccinated provided by the UK Government department known as the Office for National Statistics as you can see from the following chart –

You can read all about the above mortality rates in detail here.

1. Activation of latent viruses:
   
   There is a concern that mRNA vaccination could activate dormant viruses, such as herpes or HIV. Further research is needed to understand the potential risks and should have been carried out before giving the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine to children and pregnant women.

In-Depth Explanation:
Latent viruses remain dormant in the body for extended periods without causing symptoms. Examples of latent viruses include herpes simplex virus (HSV) and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). These viruses can persist in the body by integrating their genetic material into the host’s DNA or by forming a protective shell called a virion.
There is a theoretical concern that mRNA vaccination could activate latent viruses by stimulating the immune system. When the immune system is activated, it produces cytokines and chemokines, signalling molecules that help recruit immune cells to the site of infection. These immune cells can potentially recognize and target latent viruses, leading to the activation and replication of the virus.
Sadly, plenty of evidence exists to support this claim and the UK Government has published it. Clinical trials and real-world data have shown that the vaccinated are much more likely to be infected with the alleged COVID-19 virus than the unvaccinated. This suggests that the “vaccines” have either destroyed the immune systems of recipients or reactivated latent HIV viruses and caused recipients to develop Vaccine-Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome (VAIDS).
Furthermore, the FACT mRNA in the vaccine is not quickly degraded or eliminated by the body, but instead multiplies millions of times and passes the blood-brain barrier may go some way to explaining why COVID-19 mRNA vaccines have the potential to activate latent viruses.

1. Alteration of the immune response:
   Some researchers have suggested that mRNA vaccines could alter the immune system’s ability to recognize and respond to other pathogens.

In-Depth Explanation:
The immune system is a complex network of cells, tissues, and organs that work together to recognize and eliminate pathogens. One of the key components of the immune system is the adaptive immune response, which involves the production of antibodies and the activation of immune cells called lymphocytes. The adaptive immune response is highly specific and can recognize and neutralize a wide range of pathogens, including viruses, bacteria, and parasites.
There is a concern that mRNA vaccination could alter the immune system’s ability to recognize and respond to other pathogens. This could potentially reduce the effectiveness of the immune system in fighting off infections and increase the risk of disease.
This may explain why the vaccinated have a much higher mortality rate per 100,000 population and age than the unvaccinated.

Source

Conclusion​

The potential risks of mRNA vaccination to the immune system are a matter of ongoing research, and it is clear from the official data that the benefits of these “vaccines” in preventing severe COVID-19 infections do not outweigh the potential risks.
How can it be when the real-world effectiveness of the vaccines is in negative territory?

As with any vaccine, it is essential to weigh the risks and benefits and make an informed decision about vaccination.
In summary, mRNA vaccination has failed to protect against the alleged COVID-19 disease, and its potential serious impact on the immune system remains a topic of discussion that is getting louder and louder.
The fact that mRNA COVID-19 vaccines are still being administered is astounding when we consider all of this.