I was planning on writing about The Twitter Files (again) today, but I feel like I haven’t done anything else the last week (which is dumb, because I have). So instead I’ll point you to Brad’s amazing Twitter Files de-roll of what has been released so far and will undoubtedly write about the story in the near future — it’s sort of my wheelhouse!
So today we’re taking a complete detour and talking about something I haven’t really mentioned much in the past because of my glaring deficiencies in the arena: ivermectin.
It took a strange little trip to get here: while reading about Sam Bankman-Fried being arrested (the day before testifying before congress, because of course it was), I started thinking about my two previous articles and the surprising finding that FTX didn’t “fund the trial that killed ivermectin” — although who actually did fund it is probably worse. (As before, you’ll probably have to enlarge here)
Yes. That’s THE Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Here’s the relevant section from my article on the subject:
From the start, a section of the population was extremely suspicious of this trial, namely because of the massive conflict of interest of the study’s backers (page 5). I’ve previously written about Bill Gates push into the vaccine industry and — wouldn’t you know it? — we find him in the middle of the Together Trial as well (along with Pfizer and anti-ivermectin FDA stooges).
Looking at the list of players surrounding the Together Trial, it’s a near certainty that the study was designed so ivermectin would ‘fail’ (leaving emergency authorizations in place) and to 're-enforce’ the need for more tests, faster vaccine development, and have treatments ‘ready in advance’ — all major long-term goals of the players involved.
You’ll probably remember that the Together Trial basically drove the nail into the coffin of Ivermectin as an ‘allowable’ option for covid 19. In an unprecedented (at that time) assault on freedom in the medical community, doctors were threatened (and still are!) if they dared utter the I word. (Yet the government continued to give Ivermectin to Afghani immigrants on the off chance they had a parasitic infection — subtly admitting the drug is perfectly safe for human consumption, unlike the FDA:)
Yet in the entire time that ivermectin’s ability to stop covid has been ‘debated’, I have heard exactly nobody explain to me how my hypothetical covid treatment is between anybody but me and my doctor. If we both agree that ivermectin is worth a shot, why does the paid-off FDA get to override that decision?
Of course, in America today the freedom-based argument rarely prevails, so we must look at other avenues to attack the problems we face. And today something occurred to me that I’m not sure I’ve seen mentioned in the Great Ivermectin Debate.
Going to the Together Trial publication site, I grabbed the first Ivermectin study listed. Here’s what we see (highlighting mine):
My question is very, very simple:
When a patient has had symptoms of covid for up to 7 days and has at least one risk factor for disease progression, do we give them a covid vaccine?
Of course not. In fact, we’ve allowed Big Pharma and the “experts” to claim that it takes roughly 40 days after you start the jab regimen before you’re ACTUALLY “vaccinated” (ensuring a fake 100% efficacy at the end of that 40 days). So by definition, the vaccine must be administered over a month in advance of contracting covid. (Which - you know - shouldn’t be a thing after getting a vaccine, but - you know.)
So the ‘experts’ are able to kill off possible treatments and threaten doctors who dare disobey BASED ON CASES IN WHICH THE VACCINE WOULD BE USELESS ANYWAY! If the vaccine gets the benefit of being administered OVER A MONTH IN ADVANCE, why does Ivermectin or [whatever other drug] not get that same benefit of the doubt?
One thing often missed about "placebo trials" is that they don't study "cured."
Placebos are, to be frank, controlled mysticism. A placebo effect only exists if the treatment used "did not cause the observed improvement." Cured is not tested. When any improvement (even a cure,) occurs on the placebo arm, it's simply ignored. It has to be ignored because - if an improvement is found to have a real cause (every real effect has a real cause), then it's not a "placebo effect," it's a "real effect.
In each of the trials, CURED was simply ignored. Over 600 million people have "RECOVERED " from COVID. Not one is, or has been "CURED." Why not. If there were an independent (of treatments used) test of CURED, it would soon become obvious that ivermectin CURES COVID. As long as they can limit the trials to the "Gold Standard " of double blind placebo controlled, they never have to worry about those pesky "cures" like Ivermectin.
To your health, Tracy
Author: A New Theory of Cure
It was notable that the SEC's press release on FTX yesterday cited Bankman-Fried's political contributions.