Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Bu video yüklenirken bir sorun oluştu. Bu geçici bir ağ sorunundan kaynaklanıyor olabilir veya video kullanılamıyor olabilir.

Ana Sayfaya Dön

Fauci claimed Ivermectin didn't work so he could unleash his EUA gene therapies. 106 studies (200,000+ patients) found Ivermectin cut Covid mortality 47%, hospitalizations 34%, cases 79%, raised viral clearance 44%, and improved recovery 39%. See ⬇️ to get your US-made Ivermectin.

Catturd ™

4,070,478 subscribers

134,310 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce •via X (Twitter)

Bilim & Teknoloji Haberler & Politika

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Yorum

Yorum bulunmuyor

Orijinal gönderinin yorumları burada görünecek

Benzer Videolar

The ONLY way our government could inject the entire population with experimental gene therapies was to FRAUDULENTLY claim ivermectin didn’t work. We now have 106 studies involving 200,000+ patients showing ivermectin: CUT mortality by 47% CUT hospitalizations by 34% CUT infections by 79% BOOSTED viral clearance by 44% IMPROVED recovery by 39%

The ONLY way our government could inject the entire population with experimental gene therapies was to FRAUDULENTLY claim ivermectin didn’t work. We now have 106 studies involving 200,000+ patients showing ivermectin: CUT mortality by 47% CUT hospitalizations by 34% CUT infections by 79% BOOSTED viral clearance by 44% IMPROVED recovery by 39%

Nicolas Hulscher, MPH

70,457 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

Fauci ILLEGALLY claimed ivermectin didn’t work and was dangerous so they could inject the ENTIRE population with emergency-use-authorized gene therapies. 106 studies with 200,000+ patients show ivermectin: REDUCED COVID cases by 79% REDUCED mortality by 47% REDUCED hospitalization by 34%

Fauci ILLEGALLY claimed ivermectin didn’t work and was dangerous so they could inject the ENTIRE population with emergency-use-authorized gene therapies. 106 studies with 200,000+ patients show ivermectin: REDUCED COVID cases by 79% REDUCED mortality by 47% REDUCED hospitalization by 34%

Nicolas Hulscher, MPH

156,121 görüntüleme • 2 gün önce

Fauci and the mass media launched the ivermectin “horse-paste” narrative so they could obtain emergency use authorization for lethal mRNA injections. They resorted to altering Joe Rogan’s appearance to make him look like a zombie because ivermectin rapidly resolved his COVID. We now have 106 ivermectin studies involving over 200,000 patients showing MAJOR reductions in mortality, hospitalization, and illness duration.

Fauci and the mass media launched the ivermectin “horse-paste” narrative so they could obtain emergency use authorization for lethal mRNA injections. They resorted to altering Joe Rogan’s appearance to make him look like a zombie because ivermectin rapidly resolved his COVID. We now have 106 ivermectin studies involving over 200,000 patients showing MAJOR reductions in mortality, hospitalization, and illness duration.

Nicolas Hulscher, MPH

66,059 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

Ivermectin is often recognized – 2nd to penicillin – for having the greatest impact on human health. Its discovery even won the Nobel Prize. But the propagandists, like Chris Cuomo, told you it was a “dangerous horse dewormer.” Well, over 100 studies now show that ivermectin is profoundly effective against COVID-19. Specifically, improvements in Mortality: 48% improved survival rate Hospitalization: 34% reduced hospitalization rate Recovery: 38% faster recovery rate Cases: 81% reduction in COVID-19 cases Viral clearance: 41% improved viral clearance Ivermectin also has an exceptional safety profile. It’s safer than Tylenol, and it is credited for bringing river blindness to the brink of extinction. And it’s not like this is buried information. If the TV propagandists bothered with a simple Google search, they could have figured this out. Now, ivermectin is emerging as a “very effective” drug against certain cancers. Imagine that.

The Vigilant Fox 🦊

1,405,331 görüntüleme • 2 yıl önce

When I caught Covid, my friends rushed doses of Ivermectin to me — kicked Covid in 24 hours. Here’s a cancer surgeon revealing her discoveries about the impact of Ivermectin on CANCER… 9 min. must see: Also — Compelling Evidence for Ivermectin in Treating Covid: · Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance Review — This review, which summarized findings from 27 studies, concluded that ivermectin demonstrates a strong signal of therapeutic efficacy against COVID-19. This includes both prevention and treatment aspects. · Meta-Analysis on Ivermectin — A meta-analysis covering 96 studies and over 135,000 patients suggests that ivermectin has shown effectiveness in combating COVID-19. This analysis points towards ivermectin's role in reducing severity and improving health outcomes. · Antiviral Effect Study — A study aimed at assessing the antiviral effect of high-dose ivermectin found it to have an impact on viral load, suggesting its potential in reducing the severity of the disease by decreasing the viral replication. Evidence for Ivermectin in Treating Cancer as summarized by Dr. William Makis, Radiologist, Oncologist, Cancer Researcher. NEW ARTICLE: IVERMECTIN and Protocols for CANCER Ivermectin has a dozen anti-cancer mechanisms but they can be summarized into two main ones: 1. Inhibits cancer proliferation signaling pathways (Akt, mTOR, Wnt) 2. Inhibits Cancer Stem Cells IVERMECTIN will act against regular CANCER as well as Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Induced TURBO CANCER (which is highly resistant to chemo) Here are recent studies on IVERMECTIN use in certain types of cancer: BLADDER CANCER - (2024 Fan et al) - Ivermectin Inhibits Bladder Cancer Cell Growth and Induces Oxidative Stress and DNA Damage LUNG CANCER - (2024 Man-Yuan Li et al) - Ivermectin induces nonprotective autophagy by downregulating PAK1 and apoptosis in lung adenocarcinoma cells GLIOMA - (2024 Xing Hu et al) - Ivermectin as a potential therapeutic strategy for glioma MULTIPLE MYELOMA - (2024 Yang Song et al) - Gene signatures to therapeutics: Assessing the potential of ivermectin against t(4;14) multiple myeloma OVARIAN CANCER - (2023 Jawad et al) - Ivermectin augments the anti-cancer activity of pitavastatin in ovarian cancer cells PROSTATE CANCER - (2022 Lu et al) - Integrated analysis reveals FOXA1 and Ku70/Ku80 as targets of ivermectin in prostate cancer COLON CANCER - (2022, Alghamdi et al) - Efficacy of ivermectin against colon cancer induced by dimethylhydrazine in male wistar rats PANCREATIC CANCER - (2022 Lee et al) - Ivermectin and gemcitabine combination treatment induces apoptosis of pancreatic cancer cells via mitochondrial dysfunction MELANOMA - (2022 Zhang et al) - Drug repurposing of ivermectin abrogates neutrophil extracellular traps and prevents melanoma metastasis IVERMECTIN has proven anti-cancer activity against some 20 cancer types, although these are pre-clinical studies. We will never see clinical studies because Ivermectin is off patent and cheap. Merck, which used to have a patent on Ivermectin, has partnered with Moderna on mRNA Cancer Vaccines. IVERMECTIN is so safe, that in much of the civilized world, it is available over the counter, no prescription needed. Ivermectin is annually taken by close to 250 million people.

When I caught Covid, my friends rushed doses of Ivermectin to me — kicked Covid in 24 hours. Here’s a cancer surgeon revealing her discoveries about the impact of Ivermectin on CANCER… 9 min. must see: Also — Compelling Evidence for Ivermectin in Treating Covid: · Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance Review — This review, which summarized findings from 27 studies, concluded that ivermectin demonstrates a strong signal of therapeutic efficacy against COVID-19. This includes both prevention and treatment aspects. · Meta-Analysis on Ivermectin — A meta-analysis covering 96 studies and over 135,000 patients suggests that ivermectin has shown effectiveness in combating COVID-19. This analysis points towards ivermectin's role in reducing severity and improving health outcomes. · Antiviral Effect Study — A study aimed at assessing the antiviral effect of high-dose ivermectin found it to have an impact on viral load, suggesting its potential in reducing the severity of the disease by decreasing the viral replication. Evidence for Ivermectin in Treating Cancer as summarized by Dr. William Makis, Radiologist, Oncologist, Cancer Researcher. NEW ARTICLE: IVERMECTIN and Protocols for CANCER Ivermectin has a dozen anti-cancer mechanisms but they can be summarized into two main ones: 1. Inhibits cancer proliferation signaling pathways (Akt, mTOR, Wnt) 2. Inhibits Cancer Stem Cells IVERMECTIN will act against regular CANCER as well as Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Induced TURBO CANCER (which is highly resistant to chemo) Here are recent studies on IVERMECTIN use in certain types of cancer: BLADDER CANCER - (2024 Fan et al) - Ivermectin Inhibits Bladder Cancer Cell Growth and Induces Oxidative Stress and DNA Damage LUNG CANCER - (2024 Man-Yuan Li et al) - Ivermectin induces nonprotective autophagy by downregulating PAK1 and apoptosis in lung adenocarcinoma cells GLIOMA - (2024 Xing Hu et al) - Ivermectin as a potential therapeutic strategy for glioma MULTIPLE MYELOMA - (2024 Yang Song et al) - Gene signatures to therapeutics: Assessing the potential of ivermectin against t(4;14) multiple myeloma OVARIAN CANCER - (2023 Jawad et al) - Ivermectin augments the anti-cancer activity of pitavastatin in ovarian cancer cells PROSTATE CANCER - (2022 Lu et al) - Integrated analysis reveals FOXA1 and Ku70/Ku80 as targets of ivermectin in prostate cancer COLON CANCER - (2022, Alghamdi et al) - Efficacy of ivermectin against colon cancer induced by dimethylhydrazine in male wistar rats PANCREATIC CANCER - (2022 Lee et al) - Ivermectin and gemcitabine combination treatment induces apoptosis of pancreatic cancer cells via mitochondrial dysfunction MELANOMA - (2022 Zhang et al) - Drug repurposing of ivermectin abrogates neutrophil extracellular traps and prevents melanoma metastasis IVERMECTIN has proven anti-cancer activity against some 20 cancer types, although these are pre-clinical studies. We will never see clinical studies because Ivermectin is off patent and cheap. Merck, which used to have a patent on Ivermectin, has partnered with Moderna on mRNA Cancer Vaccines. IVERMECTIN is so safe, that in much of the civilized world, it is available over the counter, no prescription needed. Ivermectin is annually taken by close to 250 million people.

Bobby

160,046 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

During COVID, drugs like ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine were heavily demonized by Fauci and others, not because they didn’t work, but because their effectiveness meant Fauci and his friends would be unable to roll out their vaccine under Emergency Use Authorization. “If you had an effective treatment, you couldn’t have an emergency use authorized vaccine.” “The Tony Fauci’s of the world were prohibiting those therapies to come forward. Because if there was an effective therapy, then there was no way you could get new patented drugs, biologics and vaccines approved under emergency use authorization.”

During COVID, drugs like ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine were heavily demonized by Fauci and others, not because they didn’t work, but because their effectiveness meant Fauci and his friends would be unable to roll out their vaccine under Emergency Use Authorization. “If you had an effective treatment, you couldn’t have an emergency use authorized vaccine.” “The Tony Fauci’s of the world were prohibiting those therapies to come forward. Because if there was an effective therapy, then there was no way you could get new patented drugs, biologics and vaccines approved under emergency use authorization.”

Children’s Health Defense

10,277 görüntüleme • 7 ay önce

Renowned immunologist Dr. Robert Clancy delivers a stunning verdict: Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin are effective against COVID. His evidence? Dramatic recovery in post-vaccine injury patients, with a large proportion seeing a "resolution of symptoms." He presents a powerful philosophical argument: Unlike single-target man-made drugs, these "God-made" molecules have multiple, broad mechanisms of action. Nature's design is brilliant. A plant doesn't know which pathogen will attack, so it builds layered defenses to prevent its cellular machinery from being hijacked. The lesson is clear. We should stop overlooking these sophisticated, multi-target therapies.

Renowned immunologist Dr. Robert Clancy delivers a stunning verdict: Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin are effective against COVID. His evidence? Dramatic recovery in post-vaccine injury patients, with a large proportion seeing a "resolution of symptoms." He presents a powerful philosophical argument: Unlike single-target man-made drugs, these "God-made" molecules have multiple, broad mechanisms of action. Nature's design is brilliant. A plant doesn't know which pathogen will attack, so it builds layered defenses to prevent its cellular machinery from being hijacked. The lesson is clear. We should stop overlooking these sophisticated, multi-target therapies.

Camus

52,344 görüntüleme • 11 ay önce

RFK Jr. Exposes the Real Reason Ivermectin & Hydroxychloroquine Were Suppressed In a stunning revelation, RFK Jr. lays bare the hidden motives behind the aggressive suppression of ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine during the COVID-19 pandemic. These drugs—both with decades of proven safety and billions of doses administered—were systematically discredited, not for medical reasons, but for legal and financial ones. At the heart of the issue: a little-known federal law prohibiting the FDA from granting Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for vaccines if any existing, approved medication is shown to be effective against the target disease. If ivermectin or hydroxychloroquine had been acknowledged as effective against COVID-19, the EUA for vaccines would have been illegal. The result? A $200 billion vaccine enterprise could have collapsed overnight. Despite mounting evidence—including 17,000 doctors signing petitions and numerous peer-reviewed studies—officials like Tony Fauci led a relentless campaign to discredit these treatments. Ivermectin, a Nobel Prize-winning drug, was dismissed as “horse medicine,” while hydroxychloroquine was falsely labeled as dangerous. The goal? To ensure the vaccines remained the only “approved” solution. But why did the attacks continue even after the vaccines received EUA? The law appears to require that EUA status be revoked if a functional treatment emerges. The incentive to “kill” ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine was never about science—it was about protecting a financial empire. Leading experts, including Yale’s Harvey Risch and Dr. Peter McCullough (the most published physician in his field), have treated tens of thousands of COVID patients successfully with these drugs. Their conclusion, backed by data: Half a million American lives could have been saved. This isn’t just a medical scandal—it’s a betrayal of public trust. The question remains: How many lives were lost to protect a narrative?

RFK Jr. Exposes the Real Reason Ivermectin & Hydroxychloroquine Were Suppressed In a stunning revelation, RFK Jr. lays bare the hidden motives behind the aggressive suppression of ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine during the COVID-19 pandemic. These drugs—both with decades of proven safety and billions of doses administered—were systematically discredited, not for medical reasons, but for legal and financial ones. At the heart of the issue: a little-known federal law prohibiting the FDA from granting Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for vaccines if any existing, approved medication is shown to be effective against the target disease. If ivermectin or hydroxychloroquine had been acknowledged as effective against COVID-19, the EUA for vaccines would have been illegal. The result? A $200 billion vaccine enterprise could have collapsed overnight. Despite mounting evidence—including 17,000 doctors signing petitions and numerous peer-reviewed studies—officials like Tony Fauci led a relentless campaign to discredit these treatments. Ivermectin, a Nobel Prize-winning drug, was dismissed as “horse medicine,” while hydroxychloroquine was falsely labeled as dangerous. The goal? To ensure the vaccines remained the only “approved” solution. But why did the attacks continue even after the vaccines received EUA? The law appears to require that EUA status be revoked if a functional treatment emerges. The incentive to “kill” ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine was never about science—it was about protecting a financial empire. Leading experts, including Yale’s Harvey Risch and Dr. Peter McCullough (the most published physician in his field), have treated tens of thousands of COVID patients successfully with these drugs. Their conclusion, backed by data: Half a million American lives could have been saved. This isn’t just a medical scandal—it’s a betrayal of public trust. The question remains: How many lives were lost to protect a narrative?

Camus

1,092,066 görüntüleme • 10 ay önce

I remember during COVID when my late husband, a family practice doctor, called in a prescription to CVS and the pharmacist refused to fill it. COVID gave these pharmacists the power to undermine a doctor’s treatment plan—something that should never have happened. My husband was furious and said this had never occurred in his 30 years of practice. He eventually found a family-owned compounding pharmacy that filled the prescriptions. This is exactly what Senator Johnson was talking about when he questioned Fauci: they made drugs like ivermectin impossible to obtain because they worked, so they could secure emergency use authorization for the COVID vaccine.

I remember during COVID when my late husband, a family practice doctor, called in a prescription to CVS and the pharmacist refused to fill it. COVID gave these pharmacists the power to undermine a doctor’s treatment plan—something that should never have happened. My husband was furious and said this had never occurred in his 30 years of practice. He eventually found a family-owned compounding pharmacy that filled the prescriptions. This is exactly what Senator Johnson was talking about when he questioned Fauci: they made drugs like ivermectin impossible to obtain because they worked, so they could secure emergency use authorization for the COVID vaccine.

Dr. Dawn Michael

166,166 görüntüleme • 11 gün önce

Joe Rogan unloads on Anthony Fauci with Landman creator Taylor Sheridan and calls out the liberals who still refuse to admit he lied under oath to the American people during COVID: ROGAN: “Tulsi Gabbard just exposed Fauci for lying in front of Congress and for using American tax dollars to fund gain of function research in China.” SHERIDAN: “Fauci was begging Biden for a pardon on his last day in office. That’s a pretty good indicator that there might’ve been a crime committed.” ROGAN: “RFK Jr’s book exposed Dr. Fauci for running this exact same playbook during the AIDS pandemic. He was the guy preventing people from getting alternative medications. Fauci wanted everyone on AZT which was killing people quicker than cancer.” SHERIDAN: “Wow.” ROGAN: “Jon Stewart destroyed Stephen Colbert when he went on his show during COVID. He made it so obvious that it came from the Wuhan lab.” SHERIDAN: “They were labeling people who thought it came from China as racist.” ROGAN: “If you’re still saying COVID came from a natural origin you need to shut your dirty mouth. It absolutely came from a lab leak.” SHERIDAN: “When you got attacked for taking Ivermectin I looked up the CDC website. Their own website admitted that Ivermectin was effective specifically against COVID.” ROGAN: “All while they were mocking me for taking horse dewormer.” SHERIDAN: “They were telling the whole world not to take this drug, but it was literally posted on the government website that Ivermectin works.”

Joe Rogan unloads on Anthony Fauci with Landman creator Taylor Sheridan and calls out the liberals who still refuse to admit he lied under oath to the American people during COVID: ROGAN: “Tulsi Gabbard just exposed Fauci for lying in front of Congress and for using American tax dollars to fund gain of function research in China.” SHERIDAN: “Fauci was begging Biden for a pardon on his last day in office. That’s a pretty good indicator that there might’ve been a crime committed.” ROGAN: “RFK Jr’s book exposed Dr. Fauci for running this exact same playbook during the AIDS pandemic. He was the guy preventing people from getting alternative medications. Fauci wanted everyone on AZT which was killing people quicker than cancer.” SHERIDAN: “Wow.” ROGAN: “Jon Stewart destroyed Stephen Colbert when he went on his show during COVID. He made it so obvious that it came from the Wuhan lab.” SHERIDAN: “They were labeling people who thought it came from China as racist.” ROGAN: “If you’re still saying COVID came from a natural origin you need to shut your dirty mouth. It absolutely came from a lab leak.” SHERIDAN: “When you got attacked for taking Ivermectin I looked up the CDC website. Their own website admitted that Ivermectin was effective specifically against COVID.” ROGAN: “All while they were mocking me for taking horse dewormer.” SHERIDAN: “They were telling the whole world not to take this drug, but it was literally posted on the government website that Ivermectin works.”

Joe Rogan Recaps

20,155 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

The Ivermectin Effect They Didn't Want You to Know. In a revelatory interview, Dr. Sabine Hazan, a gastroenterologist and researcher, shared groundbreaking data and a harrowing story from the front lines of the pandemic. Her research uncovered a paradoxical effect of Ivermectin: it significantly increases beneficial bifidobacteria in the gut within 24 hours. This is counterintuitive for an anti-parasitic drug and suggests a novel mechanism of action. Dr. Hazan hypothesizes this is because Ivermectin is a fermented product of Streptomyces bacteria, which shares a phylum with bifidobacteria. The story turns personal and urgent. While running an FDA-watched, placebo-controlled trial, Dr. Hazan faced an ethical nightmare: watching high-risk patients in the placebo group crash and head toward death. She made the courageous decision to intervene. One patient, a diabetic with chronic renal failure and oxygen levels plummeting into the 60s and 70s, was on his way to the hospital. Dr. Hazan instructed him to take 36mg of Ivermectin with a fatty meal (french fries) to drastically increase absorption—a critical step validated by Merck's original studies but ignored by later flawed trials. The result was nothing short of miraculous. By the time the patient arrived at the hospital, his oxygen saturation had risen from the critical 60s to 92%. Dr. Hazan meticulously documented the entire journey, refuting any claims of a faulty oximeter reading. This was the moment she knew Ivermectin was a key. Yet, when she published a paper on her successful combination therapy for hypoxic patients, it was retracted by a private publishing house that overruled the peer reviewers—a stark example of the suppression faced by repurposed, non-profitable drugs. She poses a devastating question: How does a drug like Ivermectin, deemed safe enough for babies with scabies while under patent, suddenly become "unsafe" for dying COVID-19 patients once it's generic and cheap? Dr. Hazan’s work, published as an abstract due to the controversial nature of the drug, stands as a testament to unbiased research and the relentless pursuit of saving lives, even when it means challenging the established narrative.

The Ivermectin Effect They Didn't Want You to Know. In a revelatory interview, Dr. Sabine Hazan, a gastroenterologist and researcher, shared groundbreaking data and a harrowing story from the front lines of the pandemic. Her research uncovered a paradoxical effect of Ivermectin: it significantly increases beneficial bifidobacteria in the gut within 24 hours. This is counterintuitive for an anti-parasitic drug and suggests a novel mechanism of action. Dr. Hazan hypothesizes this is because Ivermectin is a fermented product of Streptomyces bacteria, which shares a phylum with bifidobacteria. The story turns personal and urgent. While running an FDA-watched, placebo-controlled trial, Dr. Hazan faced an ethical nightmare: watching high-risk patients in the placebo group crash and head toward death. She made the courageous decision to intervene. One patient, a diabetic with chronic renal failure and oxygen levels plummeting into the 60s and 70s, was on his way to the hospital. Dr. Hazan instructed him to take 36mg of Ivermectin with a fatty meal (french fries) to drastically increase absorption—a critical step validated by Merck's original studies but ignored by later flawed trials. The result was nothing short of miraculous. By the time the patient arrived at the hospital, his oxygen saturation had risen from the critical 60s to 92%. Dr. Hazan meticulously documented the entire journey, refuting any claims of a faulty oximeter reading. This was the moment she knew Ivermectin was a key. Yet, when she published a paper on her successful combination therapy for hypoxic patients, it was retracted by a private publishing house that overruled the peer reviewers—a stark example of the suppression faced by repurposed, non-profitable drugs. She poses a devastating question: How does a drug like Ivermectin, deemed safe enough for babies with scabies while under patent, suddenly become "unsafe" for dying COVID-19 patients once it's generic and cheap? Dr. Hazan’s work, published as an abstract due to the controversial nature of the drug, stands as a testament to unbiased research and the relentless pursuit of saving lives, even when it means challenging the established narrative.

Camus

173,087 görüntüleme • 9 ay önce

🚨 Bret Weinstein and Jeffrey Tucker expose the agenda to demonize Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine: “Every trick in the book was played.” “The idea is: you have to keep the population panicked.” “Hydroxychloroquine was taken off the map with a diabolical study in which people were wildly overdosed, and people died.” “It was made to look dangerous when it wasn't.” “You can't do that with Ivermectin because it's not toxic enough.” “It's almost impossible to give somebody enough to kill them.” “So they did other things.” “They ran studies in which they wildly underdosed.” “But the real question is, why would they bother if it's really useless?” “And I'm afraid that the answer has to be [that] if you allow people to use Ivermectin, they will discover how effective it is.” “Like hydroxychloroquine, it is generally useful against RNA viruses.” “At that point, when you introduce the vaccine, nobody will want it because there's a safe alternative.” “Why would I take something that turns out to be a gene therapy?” “There's an off-the-shelf drug that does it and costs nothing.” Tucker: “[There was] a phrase in there that drove Fauci and others crazy.” “Which was that we can get through this with natural immunity through exposure and recovery.” “That document came out about 3 weeks before the vaccine rollout.” “That was the reason they had to eliminate every possible alternative apart from injection as a solution.” Jeffrey A Tucker Brownstone Institute Bret Weinstein

🚨 Bret Weinstein and Jeffrey Tucker expose the agenda to demonize Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine: “Every trick in the book was played.” “The idea is: you have to keep the population panicked.” “Hydroxychloroquine was taken off the map with a diabolical study in which people were wildly overdosed, and people died.” “It was made to look dangerous when it wasn't.” “You can't do that with Ivermectin because it's not toxic enough.” “It's almost impossible to give somebody enough to kill them.” “So they did other things.” “They ran studies in which they wildly underdosed.” “But the real question is, why would they bother if it's really useless?” “And I'm afraid that the answer has to be [that] if you allow people to use Ivermectin, they will discover how effective it is.” “Like hydroxychloroquine, it is generally useful against RNA viruses.” “At that point, when you introduce the vaccine, nobody will want it because there's a safe alternative.” “Why would I take something that turns out to be a gene therapy?” “There's an off-the-shelf drug that does it and costs nothing.” Tucker: “[There was] a phrase in there that drove Fauci and others crazy.” “Which was that we can get through this with natural immunity through exposure and recovery.” “That document came out about 3 weeks before the vaccine rollout.” “That was the reason they had to eliminate every possible alternative apart from injection as a solution.” Jeffrey A Tucker Brownstone Institute Bret Weinstein

Children’s Health Defense

188,855 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

🚨 DR. WILLIAM MAKIS SAYS THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT IVERMECTIN DOSING GRAPH HE'S CREATED. Not a new chemotherapy drug. Not a breakthrough immunotherapy. Not a billion-dollar cancer treatment. Just one simple dosing strategy. According to Dr. William Makis, this is the dosing framework he believes everyone researching repurposed medicines for cancer should understand first. And it all starts with one number. 📌 1 mg/kg/day. Before explaining why, here's the dosing framework Dr. Makis discusses. 📊 The Four Ivermectin Dosing Ranges 🟢 Low Dose: ≤0.5 mg/kg/day Used for cancers in remission, strong family history, genetic predisposition, prophylaxis, and lower-dose protocols discussed in published case reports. 🟡 Medium Dose: 1.0 mg/kg/day Dr. Makis' recommended starting dose for most cancers. 🔵 High Dose: 2.0 mg/kg/day Discussed for very aggressive cancers, including leukaemia, pancreatic cancer, and some brain cancers. 🔴 Very High Dose: ≥2.5 mg/kg/day Discussed in selected reported cases involving extensive metastatic disease or extremely poor prognosis, where temporary visual side effects have also been reported. Now here's why Dr. Makis believes 1 mg/kg/day deserves the most attention. After reviewing laboratory research, published studies, and numerous case reports, he says this is the starting dose he recommends for most cancers. According to Dr. Makis, research has investigated Ivermectin across a surprisingly wide range of cancers, including: • Breast cancer • Colon cancer • Lung cancer • Pancreatic cancer • Kidney (renal cell) cancer • Gastric cancer • Leukemia One exception stood out. Lymphoma. Dr. Makis says he has found very little published research involving Ivermectin and lymphoma. That doesn't mean it doesn't work. It simply means the evidence is currently limited. ❓What does 1 mg/kg/day actually look like? For someone weighing 60 kg (132 lbs)... That's approximately 60 mg of Ivermectin every day. Equivalent to: 💊 Five 12 mg tablets OR 💧 About 6 mL of liquid Ivermectin, roughly one teaspoon. According to Dr. Makis, that's where he recommends starting for many cancers. Can lower doses still have an effect? ✅ He believes they can. Dr. Makis discusses a published ovarian cancer case reported by Dr. Tess Lawrie. The dosing chart lists the patient as receiving 12 mg of Ivermectin per day. During his discussion, Dr. Makis explains that this was approximately 0.2 mg/kg/day, placing it within the chart's Low Dose (≤0.5 mg/kg/day) range. 📉 According to the case report, the patient's CA125 tumor marker reportedly fell from 288 to 22 after two months. That case is one reason Dr. Makis believes Ivermectin may have anticancer activity even at lower doses. However... He also believes the available evidence suggests the effect is dose dependent. In other words... Higher doses may produce greater effects, although more clinical research is needed. What about the most aggressive cancers? • Pancreatic cancer • Leukemia • Brain cancer For cancers like these, Dr. Makis discusses doses around 2 mg/kg/day in selected situations. He notes that Ivermectin crosses the blood-brain barrier, although not very efficiently, which is one reason he says higher doses may be considered for some brain cancers. He also discusses a case reported by Dr. Allan Landrito. According to Dr. Makis, a physician with terminal gallbladder cancer reportedly took 2 mg/kg/day for 14 months. He says her cancer eventually disappeared. She experienced temporary visual side effects that resolved after a few days. ❓How high have reported doses gone? According to Dr. Makis, he has seen reported doses as high as 2.5 mg/kg/day. He references patients treated by Dr. Shankara Chetty who reportedly used those doses without long-term side effects, although some experienced temporary visual disturbances that later resolved. One point Dr. Makis returns to repeatedly... Long-term use. He references the Castro study involving children with leukemia who reportedly received Ivermectin for six months without long-term side effects. He also discusses anecdotal reports of adults taking it daily for more than a year without long-term toxicity. So why aren't there larger cancer trials? Dr. Makis believes one of the biggest obstacles is economics. Because Ivermectin is an off-patent generic medicine, he argues there is little financial incentive to fund large clinical trials. Whether future research ultimately confirms or challenges these ideas remains to be seen. But Dr. Makis' message is remarkably simple. One graph. One dosing strategy. One starting point. 📌 1 mg/kg/day. Because the conversation isn't just about Ivermectin anymore. It's about whether repurposed drugs deserve the same level of scientific investigation as newer therapies. 🗨️ Do you think inexpensive repurposed medicines like Ivermectin deserve larger, well-designed clinical trials for cancer? 🔖 Save this post so you'll always have Dr. Makis' dosing framework handy, and repost it to help others discover the ongoing research into repurposed medicines. 💊 Looking for pharmaceutical grade Ivermectin, Fenbendazole, or Mebendazole? Choose RXMEDS.STORE. Trusted by thousands of customers worldwide. #Ivermectin #CancerResearch #RepurposedDrugs #Oncology #CancerCare #MedicalResearch #PancreaticCancer #MakisMD #RxMeds

🚨 DR. WILLIAM MAKIS SAYS THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT IVERMECTIN DOSING GRAPH HE'S CREATED. Not a new chemotherapy drug. Not a breakthrough immunotherapy. Not a billion-dollar cancer treatment. Just one simple dosing strategy. According to Dr. William Makis, this is the dosing framework he believes everyone researching repurposed medicines for cancer should understand first. And it all starts with one number. 📌 1 mg/kg/day. Before explaining why, here's the dosing framework Dr. Makis discusses. 📊 The Four Ivermectin Dosing Ranges 🟢 Low Dose: ≤0.5 mg/kg/day Used for cancers in remission, strong family history, genetic predisposition, prophylaxis, and lower-dose protocols discussed in published case reports. 🟡 Medium Dose: 1.0 mg/kg/day Dr. Makis' recommended starting dose for most cancers. 🔵 High Dose: 2.0 mg/kg/day Discussed for very aggressive cancers, including leukaemia, pancreatic cancer, and some brain cancers. 🔴 Very High Dose: ≥2.5 mg/kg/day Discussed in selected reported cases involving extensive metastatic disease or extremely poor prognosis, where temporary visual side effects have also been reported. Now here's why Dr. Makis believes 1 mg/kg/day deserves the most attention. After reviewing laboratory research, published studies, and numerous case reports, he says this is the starting dose he recommends for most cancers. According to Dr. Makis, research has investigated Ivermectin across a surprisingly wide range of cancers, including: • Breast cancer • Colon cancer • Lung cancer • Pancreatic cancer • Kidney (renal cell) cancer • Gastric cancer • Leukemia One exception stood out. Lymphoma. Dr. Makis says he has found very little published research involving Ivermectin and lymphoma. That doesn't mean it doesn't work. It simply means the evidence is currently limited. ❓What does 1 mg/kg/day actually look like? For someone weighing 60 kg (132 lbs)... That's approximately 60 mg of Ivermectin every day. Equivalent to: 💊 Five 12 mg tablets OR 💧 About 6 mL of liquid Ivermectin, roughly one teaspoon. According to Dr. Makis, that's where he recommends starting for many cancers. Can lower doses still have an effect? ✅ He believes they can. Dr. Makis discusses a published ovarian cancer case reported by Dr. Tess Lawrie. The dosing chart lists the patient as receiving 12 mg of Ivermectin per day. During his discussion, Dr. Makis explains that this was approximately 0.2 mg/kg/day, placing it within the chart's Low Dose (≤0.5 mg/kg/day) range. 📉 According to the case report, the patient's CA125 tumor marker reportedly fell from 288 to 22 after two months. That case is one reason Dr. Makis believes Ivermectin may have anticancer activity even at lower doses. However... He also believes the available evidence suggests the effect is dose dependent. In other words... Higher doses may produce greater effects, although more clinical research is needed. What about the most aggressive cancers? • Pancreatic cancer • Leukemia • Brain cancer For cancers like these, Dr. Makis discusses doses around 2 mg/kg/day in selected situations. He notes that Ivermectin crosses the blood-brain barrier, although not very efficiently, which is one reason he says higher doses may be considered for some brain cancers. He also discusses a case reported by Dr. Allan Landrito. According to Dr. Makis, a physician with terminal gallbladder cancer reportedly took 2 mg/kg/day for 14 months. He says her cancer eventually disappeared. She experienced temporary visual side effects that resolved after a few days. ❓How high have reported doses gone? According to Dr. Makis, he has seen reported doses as high as 2.5 mg/kg/day. He references patients treated by Dr. Shankara Chetty who reportedly used those doses without long-term side effects, although some experienced temporary visual disturbances that later resolved. One point Dr. Makis returns to repeatedly... Long-term use. He references the Castro study involving children with leukemia who reportedly received Ivermectin for six months without long-term side effects. He also discusses anecdotal reports of adults taking it daily for more than a year without long-term toxicity. So why aren't there larger cancer trials? Dr. Makis believes one of the biggest obstacles is economics. Because Ivermectin is an off-patent generic medicine, he argues there is little financial incentive to fund large clinical trials. Whether future research ultimately confirms or challenges these ideas remains to be seen. But Dr. Makis' message is remarkably simple. One graph. One dosing strategy. One starting point. 📌 1 mg/kg/day. Because the conversation isn't just about Ivermectin anymore. It's about whether repurposed drugs deserve the same level of scientific investigation as newer therapies. 🗨️ Do you think inexpensive repurposed medicines like Ivermectin deserve larger, well-designed clinical trials for cancer? 🔖 Save this post so you'll always have Dr. Makis' dosing framework handy, and repost it to help others discover the ongoing research into repurposed medicines. 💊 Looking for pharmaceutical grade Ivermectin, Fenbendazole, or Mebendazole? Choose RXMEDS.STORE. Trusted by thousands of customers worldwide. #Ivermectin #CancerResearch #RepurposedDrugs #Oncology #CancerCare #MedicalResearch #PancreaticCancer #MakisMD #RxMeds

RXMEDS.STORE

356,077 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

He sold his soul to Big Pharma and they fired him anyways. 🤦‍♂️ Vinay Prasad Vinay Prasad MD MPH is one of the many reasons MAHA is in deep trouble...and he really is a cautionary tale. He was wrong about Ivermectin for COVID-19 and he was even more wrong about Ivermectin, Mebendazole and Fenbendazole in Cancer. But he was "Big Pharma" and "TV" friendly, so MAHA backed his hiring into the FDA, where he took on several important roles. This is what happens when you replace a real movement, with actors. The strategy of trying to meet Big Pharma halfway on corruption and fraud, by hiring people who are only "mildly corrupted" and still love Big Pharma, is a poor one, because it's very transparent. Vinay's arguments about repurposed drugs are so painfully idiotic, that I can't fathom how he can hold on to his medical license as an Oncologist, let alone be shoved in front of millions of Americans at the FDA. "It's not plausible anti-parasitics work for cancer" except Johns Hopkins was granted a PATENT on Mebendazole for use in Glioblastoma, one of the most aggressive cancers and ran two Clinical Trials including in CHILDREN. If it's "not plausible" and "we looked in the 1970s and didn't see anything", why would one of America's largest Cancer Centers spend 5 years getting a PATENT on it as well as two Clinical Trials AND put children with Brain Cancer at risk? Is Vinay really trying to tell us Johns Hopkins applied for grant funding and committed its resources to study "fringe" things that are "not plausible"? Meanwhile: - Fenbendazole Cancer Support Group on Facebook grew to over 100,000 before it was taken down - In late 2025, Florida Governor Ron Desantis committed over $60 million for Ivermectin in Cancer research via the Florida Cancer Innovation Fund - In early 2026, National Cancer Institute committed to studying Ivermectin in Cancer. Not bad for something that's "not plausible". And for all that, Vinay Prasad got kicked out of the FDA anyways. Vinay is not a stupid man, but he made a choice. "I have to bash Ivermectin" to position himself as a "moderate" and "Big Pharma friendly", and by doing so, he tore up his Hippocratic Oath (to further his career). Let's be honest, many doctors did the same during COVID-19 with the jabs. But they are pariahs on the fringe of society today. They are publicly ridiculed, mocked and no one trusts them anymore. Your average doctor has lower favorability rating than chlamydia and it's well earned. Many of these MAHA actors deserve the same fate. They sold out too. They just did it with a different flavor. The flavor of "Health Freedom".

He sold his soul to Big Pharma and they fired him anyways. 🤦‍♂️ Vinay Prasad Vinay Prasad MD MPH is one of the many reasons MAHA is in deep trouble...and he really is a cautionary tale. He was wrong about Ivermectin for COVID-19 and he was even more wrong about Ivermectin, Mebendazole and Fenbendazole in Cancer. But he was "Big Pharma" and "TV" friendly, so MAHA backed his hiring into the FDA, where he took on several important roles. This is what happens when you replace a real movement, with actors. The strategy of trying to meet Big Pharma halfway on corruption and fraud, by hiring people who are only "mildly corrupted" and still love Big Pharma, is a poor one, because it's very transparent. Vinay's arguments about repurposed drugs are so painfully idiotic, that I can't fathom how he can hold on to his medical license as an Oncologist, let alone be shoved in front of millions of Americans at the FDA. "It's not plausible anti-parasitics work for cancer" except Johns Hopkins was granted a PATENT on Mebendazole for use in Glioblastoma, one of the most aggressive cancers and ran two Clinical Trials including in CHILDREN. If it's "not plausible" and "we looked in the 1970s and didn't see anything", why would one of America's largest Cancer Centers spend 5 years getting a PATENT on it as well as two Clinical Trials AND put children with Brain Cancer at risk? Is Vinay really trying to tell us Johns Hopkins applied for grant funding and committed its resources to study "fringe" things that are "not plausible"? Meanwhile: - Fenbendazole Cancer Support Group on Facebook grew to over 100,000 before it was taken down - In late 2025, Florida Governor Ron Desantis committed over $60 million for Ivermectin in Cancer research via the Florida Cancer Innovation Fund - In early 2026, National Cancer Institute committed to studying Ivermectin in Cancer. Not bad for something that's "not plausible". And for all that, Vinay Prasad got kicked out of the FDA anyways. Vinay is not a stupid man, but he made a choice. "I have to bash Ivermectin" to position himself as a "moderate" and "Big Pharma friendly", and by doing so, he tore up his Hippocratic Oath (to further his career). Let's be honest, many doctors did the same during COVID-19 with the jabs. But they are pariahs on the fringe of society today. They are publicly ridiculed, mocked and no one trusts them anymore. Your average doctor has lower favorability rating than chlamydia and it's well earned. Many of these MAHA actors deserve the same fate. They sold out too. They just did it with a different flavor. The flavor of "Health Freedom".

William Makis

85,638 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

Oncologist Dr. William Makis describes getting attacked by the president of City of Hope cancer centers for publishing success stories using antiparasitics to treat turbo cancers: "These antiparasitics are being heavily attacked and are being suppressed every time I mention ivermectin, mebendazole, [and] fenbendazole. And I have hundreds of success stories...." This clip of Dr. Makis, a radiologist, oncologist, and cancer researcher, is taken from a panel discussion posted to the World Council for Health Rumble channel on November 24, 2025. ---------------Partial transcription of clip---------------- "So these antiparasitics are being heavily attacked, and are being suppressed every time I mention ivermectin, mebendazole, fenbendazole, and I have hundreds of success stories. I get attacked. I get attacked by mainstream doctors and mainstream oncologists. "And just going back to what Kevin McKernan said about this phenomenon of trying to retract papers, get good papers retracted, I've had this happen to me very recently. We published recently a paper on fenbendazole. Three cases of stage four cancer patients who had failed three or four or five lines of chemotherapy, and mainstream oncology regimens. These cancer patients were dying. They took fenbendazole and they became cancer free. And we followed them up, up to three years. They stayed cancer three for up to three years. So we had three cases. We published this paper a few months ago. This was only the second paper published on the antiparasitic fenbendazole in the past five years with human cases. The first one was published by Stanford University in 2021. And so they had published three cases in 2021. We published three cases in 2025. Within a month or two of the publication of our paper. Now it passed peer review and it was published. We were attacked by the editor of the paper, who's actually the president of the City of Hope cancer centers in the United States, in Atlanta, Chicago, and Phoenix. "This was Dr. Maurice [Maurie] Markman, President of City of Hope, so a big time oncologist, with a lot of, you know, big pharma funding behind him. He said he's going to pull the paper. And they didn't have a good reason to pull the paper. In fact, the reason that they were putting was that I was giving, you know, medical advice to other cancer patients with fenbendazole. And so that was some kind of a conflict of interest. And because, you know, that wasn't declared in the way they liked, that they were going to pull the paper. "And so, you know, this is an attack. We're going to see these attacks not just on Kevin McKernan and David Speicher's work in trying to make the link between Covid vaccines and these turbo cancers. But even those of us who are going to try to treat these patients, and help these patients and try to get that work published with antiparasitics and these turbo cancers, we're being attacked, and our papers are being attacked for retraction as well." #Fenbendazole #Ivermectin #Cancercure

Oncologist Dr. William Makis describes getting attacked by the president of City of Hope cancer centers for publishing success stories using antiparasitics to treat turbo cancers: "These antiparasitics are being heavily attacked and are being suppressed every time I mention ivermectin, mebendazole, [and] fenbendazole. And I have hundreds of success stories...." This clip of Dr. Makis, a radiologist, oncologist, and cancer researcher, is taken from a panel discussion posted to the World Council for Health Rumble channel on November 24, 2025. ---------------Partial transcription of clip---------------- "So these antiparasitics are being heavily attacked, and are being suppressed every time I mention ivermectin, mebendazole, fenbendazole, and I have hundreds of success stories. I get attacked. I get attacked by mainstream doctors and mainstream oncologists. "And just going back to what Kevin McKernan said about this phenomenon of trying to retract papers, get good papers retracted, I've had this happen to me very recently. We published recently a paper on fenbendazole. Three cases of stage four cancer patients who had failed three or four or five lines of chemotherapy, and mainstream oncology regimens. These cancer patients were dying. They took fenbendazole and they became cancer free. And we followed them up, up to three years. They stayed cancer three for up to three years. So we had three cases. We published this paper a few months ago. This was only the second paper published on the antiparasitic fenbendazole in the past five years with human cases. The first one was published by Stanford University in 2021. And so they had published three cases in 2021. We published three cases in 2025. Within a month or two of the publication of our paper. Now it passed peer review and it was published. We were attacked by the editor of the paper, who's actually the president of the City of Hope cancer centers in the United States, in Atlanta, Chicago, and Phoenix. "This was Dr. Maurice [Maurie] Markman, President of City of Hope, so a big time oncologist, with a lot of, you know, big pharma funding behind him. He said he's going to pull the paper. And they didn't have a good reason to pull the paper. In fact, the reason that they were putting was that I was giving, you know, medical advice to other cancer patients with fenbendazole. And so that was some kind of a conflict of interest. And because, you know, that wasn't declared in the way they liked, that they were going to pull the paper. "And so, you know, this is an attack. We're going to see these attacks not just on Kevin McKernan and David Speicher's work in trying to make the link between Covid vaccines and these turbo cancers. But even those of us who are going to try to treat these patients, and help these patients and try to get that work published with antiparasitics and these turbo cancers, we're being attacked, and our papers are being attacked for retraction as well." #Fenbendazole #Ivermectin #Cancercure

Joe Tippens

32,159 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

Ivermectin and Fenbendazole keep coming up in studies. Not the first story I've heard. Probably not the last. But here's what I've learned – from personal experience and from watching others. The Dosage (Simple Rule) If you're taking the paste – no more than the size of your pinky nail per day. Take it for several days, then take a break for a week. Got something chronic? Get advice first. My Experience I was sick in 2023. Took a small dose. The colour came back to my face in one day. Not a miracle. Just a real response. I've also seen viruses improve fast. People I know – really sick – had good results. The Cat, The Cancer, and The Missed Chance I wish I had tried this with my cat, Sam. He had cancer. The vets had no answers. The dose would have been tiny – less than a milligram, based on weight. But I didn't know then what I know now. Why Was It Stopped? It was used routinely. Until Covid. Then suddenly, availability disappeared. You gotta wonder why. Meanwhile, Ivermectin won a Nobel Prize in 2015. And arthritis and cancer share similar inflammatory pathways – Ivermectin has been shown to help both. Be Smart. Be Careful. I'm not a doctor. I recommend talking to NZDSOS – New Zealand Doctors Speaking Out with Science. A body I trust. Find the studies. Keep the dose small. Talk to people who've had good results. One More Thing The problem? They can't make money on a cheap, generic drug. So they don't study it. So they don't promote it.

Ivermectin and Fenbendazole keep coming up in studies. Not the first story I've heard. Probably not the last. But here's what I've learned – from personal experience and from watching others. The Dosage (Simple Rule) If you're taking the paste – no more than the size of your pinky nail per day. Take it for several days, then take a break for a week. Got something chronic? Get advice first. My Experience I was sick in 2023. Took a small dose. The colour came back to my face in one day. Not a miracle. Just a real response. I've also seen viruses improve fast. People I know – really sick – had good results. The Cat, The Cancer, and The Missed Chance I wish I had tried this with my cat, Sam. He had cancer. The vets had no answers. The dose would have been tiny – less than a milligram, based on weight. But I didn't know then what I know now. Why Was It Stopped? It was used routinely. Until Covid. Then suddenly, availability disappeared. You gotta wonder why. Meanwhile, Ivermectin won a Nobel Prize in 2015. And arthritis and cancer share similar inflammatory pathways – Ivermectin has been shown to help both. Be Smart. Be Careful. I'm not a doctor. I recommend talking to NZDSOS – New Zealand Doctors Speaking Out with Science. A body I trust. Find the studies. Keep the dose small. Talk to people who've had good results. One More Thing The problem? They can't make money on a cheap, generic drug. So they don't study it. So they don't promote it.

Dr. Zakaria MD

13,684 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce