Speaker 1: Up next The Truth with Lisa both part of the
Speaker 1: Welcome Back to the Truth with Lisa Booth. Iver Meden.
Speaker 1: You've heard about it in the news. Some say it's
Speaker 1: a game changer for treating COVID. Others say it's a
Speaker 1: bunch of nonsense. So who's right? If you've been watching
Speaker 1: CNN or reading the New York Times and you probably
Speaker 1: think Iver macden is just a horse de wurmer that
Speaker 1: a few crazy doctors and conservatives think can treat COVID.
Speaker 1: That's the message that the media and the medical establishment
Speaker 1: want you to hear, want you to believe. But the
Speaker 1: truth is their substantial evidence showing Iver meckden is actually
Speaker 1: quite effective at treating COVID. Dr Pierre Corey has poured
Speaker 1: through all the evidence and is one of the world's
Speaker 1: leading proponents of Iver macden as a treatment for COVID,
Speaker 1: and he's someone who should take seriously. Dr Corey is
Speaker 1: the president and a founding member of the front Line
Speaker 1: COVID nineteen Critical Care Alliance. Dr Corey leat I see
Speaker 1: us in multiple COVID hotspots, including New York City at
Speaker 1: the height of the pandemic, and during that time he
Speaker 1: also co authored several influential papers on the virus. Previously,
Speaker 1: Dr Corey was the chief of Critical Care Service and
Speaker 1: the medical director at the Trauma and Life Support Center
Speaker 1: at the University of Wisconsin, and before that, he was
Speaker 1: a physician at Beth Israel Medical Center in New York.
Speaker 1: He's also a pioneer in the use of ultrasound by
Speaker 1: physicians and the diagnosis and treatment of critically ill patients,
Speaker 1: and has won numerous teaching awards in every hospital that
Speaker 1: he has worked. But these days he has been a
Speaker 1: passionate advocate for Ivor mecden and a fierce critic of
Speaker 1: the medical establishment, which he believes is more focused on
Speaker 1: other priorities than ensuring the health of the public. Today
Speaker 1: we get to the truth of Ivor macdona. Dr Pierre Corey,
Speaker 1: you know, thank you so much for coming on the show.
Speaker 1: The Truth Quickly sa booth Is podcast actually started during
Speaker 1: COVID because I felt like the truth wasn't getting out
Speaker 1: there about things like lockdown and a lot of the
Speaker 1: data and information. So I'm really excited to talk to
Speaker 1: you about Iver macdon Yeah, I appreciate it. I'm glad
Speaker 1: to have the opportunity to do that. You told a
Speaker 1: Senate committee last December that iver mectin is effectively a
Speaker 1: miracle drug against COVID nineteen. What is it? Yeah, so
Speaker 1: iver mactin is um it's an old medicine. I guess
Speaker 1: not very old. It is very pretty much discovered in
Speaker 1: late seventies and first manufactured and distributed in the eighties
Speaker 1: and nine eighties. It's an anti parasite drug. And the
Speaker 1: discoverers of iver mecton actually won the Nobel Prize because
Speaker 1: that drug actually transformed the global health status of hundreds
Speaker 1: of millions of people that suffered from parasitic diseases. One
Speaker 1: of them was called river blindness, where men, not only men,
Speaker 1: but adults in a lot of communities in Africa were
Speaker 1: blind by the age of forty from this parasite. And
Speaker 1: so it essentially restored the site of of countless people
Speaker 1: across Africa and Asia and even South America. And so
Speaker 1: it's a really important drug historically UM and the who
Speaker 1: actually has distributed across continents hundreds of millions of doses.
Speaker 1: In fact, four billion doses have been used in humans
Speaker 1: over the last four decades. So it's a really uh
Speaker 1: well known and famous drug. The discoverers won the Nobel
Speaker 1: Prize for it. And so that's what that's what it
Speaker 1: originally was discovered to do. But over about ten years
Speaker 1: ago it was discovered in the lab that it was
Speaker 1: really effective against a number of viruses and so like
Speaker 1: ZEKEA and west nil and denge and even HIV and influenza.
Speaker 1: It was showing that, you know, at the bench it
Speaker 1: was it was it was showing that it could stop
Speaker 1: viral replication of a number of viruses similar to coronavirus.
Speaker 1: So how in terms of using it to combat COVID nineteen,
Speaker 1: you know, how is it best used against it? Well,
Speaker 1: there's a number of ways you can use it. Actually,
Speaker 1: I would say there's there's sort of four phases you
Speaker 1: could use it in. And that's what makes it sort
Speaker 1: of just this incredible drug. And as my colleague, UM
Speaker 1: and sort of mentor who first actually identified that we needed.
Speaker 1: You know, I'm part of a group, I'm part of
Speaker 1: an organization. We're just five experts in medicine, highly published,
Speaker 1: very credible. Um. We all have had many contributions to
Speaker 1: medicine and are all actually very well known prior to
Speaker 1: the pandemic. For individual contributions, and you know, we've been
Speaker 1: researching everything COVID since it started. I mean we just
Speaker 1: did nothing but read papers, exchange papers, and we were
Speaker 1: looking at all the therapeutics, all of the trials, and
Speaker 1: we you know Paul Paul Marrack, he he identified AVERMIC
Speaker 1: and as as looking just really good. Uh, probably early October,
Speaker 1: about a year ago, and we started looking into it
Speaker 1: as a group, and I wrote a review paper with
Speaker 1: the group, and we immersed ourselves in all of the
Speaker 1: trials data and we just were overwhelmed. And so um,
Speaker 1: we that that's what led to my testimony where I
Speaker 1: really spoke very forcefully about the critical need to use
Speaker 1: it and so would you use it in COVID? Well,
Speaker 1: the strongest data is in prevention. It's actually this weekly
Speaker 1: potent preventative. So if you take it regularly, um, your
Speaker 1: chances of getting COVID are drastically reduced, especially if you
Speaker 1: take it, you know, like weekly. Some of the trials
Speaker 1: are showing near hundred percent protection, some are showing a
Speaker 1: percent protection or well over ninety. Um. Some trials where
Speaker 1: they take healthcare workers once a month or even showing
Speaker 1: you seventy protection. So that's the prevention data. Then you
Speaker 1: have early treatment, which is different. You wouldn't just take
Speaker 1: one dose, you would take you know, a higher dose
Speaker 1: for some days in a row to three five days.
Speaker 1: We now advocate for five days um. And you can
Speaker 1: use it early treatment, and especially the earlier you start,
Speaker 1: people turn around immediately. Um. They really start to feel
Speaker 1: better very quickly. And we just see these consistent, amazing
Speaker 1: responses with it, and that that's been described by lots
Speaker 1: of doctors around the world. And then later on in
Speaker 1: hospital you have to use much higher doses, less effective
Speaker 1: as a single agent there, but we use combinations of
Speaker 1: therapies in the hospital and that's you know, one of
Speaker 1: them in the in the protocol. And then the last,
Speaker 1: which is incredible, is in long haul covid um. That's
Speaker 1: been just incredible story. Like we use it in long
Speaker 1: haulers and boy do they respond. We've had so many
Speaker 1: people who are like I've had a number of patients
Speaker 1: who are effectively disabled with long haul just couldn't function,
Speaker 1: Fatigue all the time, dizzy, high heart rates, sweaty, like
Speaker 1: all these odd like sort of what we call autonomic
Speaker 1: symptoms that went away with ivermectin. On the challenge with
Speaker 1: long haul is that we're finding that they actually need
Speaker 1: to stay on it, so that most of my patients
Speaker 1: with long haul they take two to three doses a week,
Speaker 1: and if they miss a dose or try to stop
Speaker 1: or try to wing them off, a lot of their
Speaker 1: symptoms come back. And so we still haven't figure out
Speaker 1: how to cure it, but we're definitely managing it really well.
Speaker 1: And how safe is it. It's one of the safest
Speaker 1: drugs known to man. So don't believe everything you read this.
Speaker 1: You know, I'm just gonna speak frankly because I'm really done.
Speaker 1: I've been doing this for a year and I'm just
Speaker 1: gonna tell you what I'm seeing and just the absurdity.
Speaker 1: But this controversy around iver mecton, I need to be clear,
Speaker 1: it's not controversy. It's corruption masquerading as controversy. It is
Speaker 1: what happens when you have a repurpose drug that's threatens
Speaker 1: the financial interests of the pharmaceutical industry. They've been doing
Speaker 1: this for years. Iver Macton is not unique at all.
Speaker 1: I mean, Mettan is a repurpose drug, and the phone
Speaker 1: student industry has been at war with repurpose drugs for
Speaker 1: decades and so when you see all of this stuff
Speaker 1: that they put out and in trying to inject you know,
Speaker 1: controversy or doubt or distorting or suppressing the data around
Speaker 1: iver mectin, it's just part of a playbook of those
Speaker 1: who have, you know, deep financial interest in making sure
Speaker 1: that iver mectin is not recognized as an effective therapeutic.
Speaker 1: And so you know, these concerns on safety is just bizarre.
Speaker 1: I mean it's not only bizarre, it's actually just absolutely false.
Speaker 1: In the w h O documents themselves, their guidelines for
Speaker 1: treating parasitic diseases, they repeatedly state that ibra mactin the
Speaker 1: side effects are generally minor and transient. One of the
Speaker 1: world experts who did a safety review of ira mactin
Speaker 1: said that severe side effects are unequivocally and exceedingly rare.
Speaker 1: It's not toxic to the liver, it's not toxic to
Speaker 1: the kidneys, it's not toxic to the lungs, and like
Speaker 1: I said, it's distributed across continents to people, old, young, infirm,
Speaker 1: more abidities for decades, and we have tons of safety
Speaker 1: data now in COVID even at very high doses and
Speaker 1: for extended durations and so there's not one lack of
Speaker 1: a safety there's not one signal that shows that it's
Speaker 1: not safe. And so even in overdoses, So in the
Speaker 1: safety review, there's acts not one documented accepted instance of
Speaker 1: a death directly caused by ivermecne, even in massive overdoses.
Speaker 1: So massive overdoses, people have gotten sick, they go to
Speaker 1: the hospital and with just supportive care, they're they're better
Speaker 1: in two to three days. But those are like you
Speaker 1: can count them on one hand the amount of times
Speaker 1: that's been reported. And so the safety is just unparalleled,
Speaker 1: absolutely unparalleled. Well, and isn't problem part of the problem
Speaker 1: as you see the media and the f DA, you know,
Speaker 1: they're trying to label it as a horsety warmer because
Speaker 1: it does have purposes for both livestock and for humans,
Speaker 1: But it isn't part of the challenges. You know, you
Speaker 1: have people taking dosages that they shouldn't be taking because
Speaker 1: obviously a dosage meant for a cow or horse that
Speaker 1: weighs like a thousand pounds or you know, more than
Speaker 1: a ton is not going to be healthy for a
Speaker 1: human being, right, And so isn't that part of the
Speaker 1: challenge there or what what is that? So the challenges
Speaker 1: this I would reframe that, which is that without guidance
Speaker 1: from the health agents, then you're not going to get
Speaker 1: that right. So, so the health agents are firmly opposed
Speaker 1: to iver mac them. Um Again, I'm sorry, but we
Speaker 1: we are seeing one of the grossest and most absurd
Speaker 1: examples of regulatory capture and history. Right. So those agencies,
Speaker 1: what I call the alphabet agencies, are literally acting under
Speaker 1: the sole intent and guidance of the pharmaceutical industry. It's
Speaker 1: absolutely clear there's abundant amounts of evidence. And it's not
Speaker 1: just around iver mactin, it's around remdessevere, it's around the vaccines.
Speaker 1: And so to ask for guidance from them on two
Speaker 1: people and how to or providers, how to prescribe and
Speaker 1: how to dose it, they're not giving it. So you're
Speaker 1: creating a situation were Unfortunately, people who you know, have
Speaker 1: followed the data, they follow credible scientists like myself and
Speaker 1: my organization. They understand its efficacy and they hear the
Speaker 1: reports from around the world and they want to use it.
Speaker 1: And so unfortunately they're they're having to self prescribe. Now
Speaker 1: those reports of overdoses where people are filling e rs.
Speaker 1: You understand at least those were completely false, like totally false,
Speaker 1: and I've been debunked, And so no one's filling up
Speaker 1: e rs with overdoses. The calls to the poison Control Center,
Speaker 1: I the vast majority of people asking questions because they
Speaker 1: were forced to take animal veterinary products. Is no one's
Speaker 1: going to prescribe it, or a very few doctors are prescribing.
Speaker 1: So it's just an unfortunate situation of a war on
Speaker 1: a very safe, old, cheap and repurpose drug, and so
Speaker 1: it's not being made available and there's not good guidance
Speaker 1: on on how to use them. So I think these
Speaker 1: people are unfortunately having the self prescribed. They're gonna make mistakes,
Speaker 1: But I gotta tell you it has such a wide
Speaker 1: margin of safety around dosing that I mean every time
Speaker 1: I read an article about people overdosing, I mean I laugh,
Speaker 1: I mean literally that it's very hard to do that.
Speaker 1: And just because you take a horse paste, I mean
Speaker 1: it clearly says on the box, you know that this
Speaker 1: this much for a thousand pound horse, this much for
Speaker 1: a two and fifty pound So just because you're taking
Speaker 1: a horse space doesn't mean that you're going to overdose
Speaker 1: and so UM. Now again I cannot advocate for veterinary products. UM.
Speaker 1: I feel bad for those people who resort to that.
Speaker 1: But you know, it's like a colleague said, you know,
Speaker 1: it's like someone who's dying of first who's forced to
Speaker 1: drink out of a muddy creek. It's it's a truly
Speaker 1: unfortunate situation. And our organization has been working tiresly trying
Speaker 1: to get the agency is trying to get someone to
Speaker 1: provide guidance to providers, at least a weak recommendation, some recommendation,
Speaker 1: and they refuse to do so. Why are they so
Speaker 1: against it? I mean, as you mentioned the alphabet agencies.
Speaker 1: You've got the f d A, the ni AGE, the
Speaker 1: World Health Organization, the Journal, American Medical Association. You all
Speaker 1: against iver MACTAM for usage to combat COVID. Why are
Speaker 1: they so against it? So there's many reasons. And again
Speaker 1: I hate sounding like a conspiracy theorist, but you know
Speaker 1: when I said regulatory caps R, the w h O
Speaker 1: has been well documented to be under the influence of
Speaker 1: the pharmaceutical industry and or philanthropy organizations which are very
Speaker 1: heavily vaccine influenced, and so it's viewed as an opponent
Speaker 1: of vaccine policy. That's one is that the one one
Speaker 1: argument is that in the eu A, so the Emergency
Speaker 1: Youth Authorization for these vaccines, it's dependent on the fact
Speaker 1: that there is no effective treatment for the disease. Because
Speaker 1: if you have an effect to treatment for the disease,
Speaker 1: if you played by the rules, the eu AS could
Speaker 1: would have to be rescinded for the vaccines. Right, So
Speaker 1: there's there's that that's a very clear and almost legal
Speaker 1: incentive to ensure that iver mectant is not recognized. So
Speaker 1: that would be one. The second is the list of
Speaker 1: financial interests that would be really kind of smashed if
Speaker 1: iver mettan was widely used and adopted is a really
Speaker 1: long list, right, so number one, um number one is
Speaker 1: just something like remdesse of her. I mean, we're seeing
Speaker 1: health industries around the world that are using this in
Speaker 1: early testing treat programs like well over seventy of people
Speaker 1: are avoiding hospital and so you would literally decrease hospitalizations
Speaker 1: on the order and that's the minimum of what would
Speaker 1: be capable of and so the appetite remdesse of her
Speaker 1: would dry up. There are competing oral anti virals that
Speaker 1: are in the pipeline from Mark and Fiser, and they
Speaker 1: want to bring those to market, and that would be
Speaker 1: a huge bonanza for them in a pandemic to bring
Speaker 1: an oral anti viral for early treatment. If iver Magnan
Speaker 1: is in that market, I mean, what happens to that
Speaker 1: that they have no market for that? And so again
Speaker 1: I'm just stating it's I've had a front row seat
Speaker 1: to this. I've seen the attacks. I've seen the distortions,
Speaker 1: the misrepresentations, the the false the false statements that are
Speaker 1: coming out of those agencies. It's it's it's just been.
Speaker 1: It's been a horror show, to be honest, and I've
Speaker 1: had an education of a lifetime. I'll never be the
Speaker 1: same again. And I just my only hopes is that
Speaker 1: when this story is written and the history books are written,
Speaker 1: and hopefully within a year or two when this comes out,
Speaker 1: is that we we we stopped this system. I mean,
Speaker 1: we're in a system where we literally are driven. It's
Speaker 1: basically run on four profit medicines. There's no appetite and
Speaker 1: there's no pathway for nonprofit medicines to make it, and
Speaker 1: and it's killing people and that's why I hope this
Speaker 1: system blows up. Well, I mean, I would love to
Speaker 1: see that. I don't trust any of these people. And
Speaker 1: you talk about the profit driven aspect of it, I mean,
Speaker 1: you look at the COVID vaccine as Viser's top seller alone.
Speaker 1: You know they're going to make over thirty three billion
Speaker 1: dollars from the two doors regimen by itself, not even
Speaker 1: including the additional amount of money they're going to make
Speaker 1: from boosters. And then you know how many boosters they
Speaker 1: actually end up we're seeing people to get. So that's
Speaker 1: so much money involved here. So what's interesting is that
Speaker 1: other countries have used like India ends Yeah, talk about India. Yeah, So, Lisa,
Speaker 1: you just mentioned right, this this endless, this endless horizon
Speaker 1: of these just astronomical profits that standing to be gained
Speaker 1: from from a market of of just endless vaccines and boosters. Right. Meanwhile, right,
Speaker 1: one of the most incredible stories, and I think one
Speaker 1: of the most major public health achievements in history, was
Speaker 1: just realized in the state of Utar Pradeshian India. Right.
Speaker 1: So it's a state in northern India has a population
Speaker 1: of two hundred and forty one million people, which is
Speaker 1: basically like a country two thirds of size the United States.
Speaker 1: I think it would be like the seventh or eighth
Speaker 1: largest country if it was a country. And that state
Speaker 1: is unique because they adopted iver macton. They first started
Speaker 1: a relaxing healthcare workers with hydroxy cork in a year ago.
Speaker 1: Then they did a study where they started giving healthcare
Speaker 1: workers I mean, and they noticed that almost none of
Speaker 1: the healthcare workers were getting sick. And so that state
Speaker 1: then put it into a policy throughout the state and
Speaker 1: they not only started doing prevention of healthcare of all
Speaker 1: healthcare workers, but they started using it in early treatment,
Speaker 1: and they started using in prevention of household contacts. And
Speaker 1: what they did is it's such an incredible story of
Speaker 1: what they did. But they had also a massive public
Speaker 1: health contact tracing. They had seventy thousand healthcare workers all
Speaker 1: on ivermectin and they went to all of the household
Speaker 1: so they did contact tracing and surveillance every household. Every
Speaker 1: positive test, they visited the house, they gave ivermectin and
Speaker 1: treatment to the person who's sick. They gave it to
Speaker 1: um the house the household contacts and using that strategy,
Speaker 1: they did incredibly well in the fall, and they did.
Speaker 1: They had some of the best numbers in the world
Speaker 1: until April May, when that huge crisis overwhelmed India. And
Speaker 1: what happened in Utar Pradesh is they had about three
Speaker 1: million migrant workers who worked in cities around India who
Speaker 1: all fled the impending lockdowns um and they fled back
Speaker 1: to Uttar Pradesh. So there was this huge like surge
Speaker 1: of cases um. But what Utarparadesh did was it's just
Speaker 1: so smart, like what they did should be the playbook
Speaker 1: for the world. But they went to all the train
Speaker 1: stations and bus stations and airports and they tested, they treated,
Speaker 1: they followed, and their cliff like drop was just impressive.
Speaker 1: So that this huge meteoric rise and then a sudden
Speaker 1: drop because they knew how to extinguish this surge. Okay,
Speaker 1: let's talk about what they achieved. Since then, they continued
Speaker 1: on with that policy and with their program. And in
Speaker 1: the last two weeks, we've been waiting for this. I've
Speaker 1: been waiting for granular data because we can see the
Speaker 1: epidemiologic data. But in the last two weeks, finally the
Speaker 1: health officials Butar Pradesh are now coming out. They're sharing
Speaker 1: really granular data and they're doing interviews and basically what
Speaker 1: happened in that state is they've effectively eradicated COVID. So
Speaker 1: in the last week, there was an article last week
Speaker 1: that showed the prior week, of the two hundred and
Speaker 1: twenty six thousand tests that were done in the previous
Speaker 1: actually twenty four hours, only eleven were positive, which is
Speaker 1: like a positive rate of like point oh four which
Speaker 1: is indescribable and effectively zero. And then in the prior
Speaker 1: two weeks they had done two and a half million
Speaker 1: tests and only two hundred one were positive, which is
Speaker 1: like a point oh seven percent, effectively zero. And they
Speaker 1: have like out of seven five districts in that state,
Speaker 1: of two or forty one million people, I think sixty
Speaker 1: five of them have no active cases of COVID. And
Speaker 1: so so when you talk about that endless mill of
Speaker 1: Monday to be made from vaccines, you're talking about a
Speaker 1: huge portion of the globe, which is two forty one
Speaker 1: million people who have eradicated COVID. And you know what
Speaker 1: their vaccination rate is, Lisa five fully vaccinated. Such a racket,
Speaker 1: So they did not do it with the vaccines. And
Speaker 1: now can you understand why there's so much opposition. Let's
Speaker 1: take a quick commercial break and then back with Dr
Speaker 1: Corey on the other side. So you've compared what's happening
Speaker 1: today with Iver Macton to Dr Fauci and the and
Speaker 1: I age not recognizing the efficacy of backdroom. I think
Speaker 1: I'm pronouncing it right for aids in the nies. What
Speaker 1: are the parallels there for the folks at home who
Speaker 1: are sort of unaware of that. So the parallel, the
Speaker 1: closest parallel is during the HIV epidemic. You know smart
Speaker 1: doctors I call him frontline doctors who are actually seeing
Speaker 1: HIV and treating them. You know that they started to
Speaker 1: see that many of the young and mostly young men
Speaker 1: in the beginning, right, were dying of this pneumonia, right,
Speaker 1: which everyone knows is pc pneumonia, which is actually a fungus.
Speaker 1: And they knew, I mean, it's this is like, I mean,
Speaker 1: it's just so straightforward. But like those doctors knew that
Speaker 1: there was a lot of literature that when Pete, when
Speaker 1: pc P pneumonia occurred in leukemia patients who are severely
Speaker 1: admit suppressed, it was really successfully treated with bactroom, right,
Speaker 1: and so it wasn't a stretch to use bathroom in
Speaker 1: these young men dying of AIDS and those that were
Speaker 1: using bathroom saw that it worked, and so they really
Speaker 1: they went to the NIH and they were saying, please
Speaker 1: provide guidance, like you should prove or recommend backtroom for
Speaker 1: the treatment of HIV and PC pneumonia. And what did
Speaker 1: they do, Lisa. They did not do that. They refused
Speaker 1: to provide guidance or recommendations on a repurpose drug for
Speaker 1: the treatment of this deadly pneumonia that was killing uh,
Speaker 1: you know young gay or HIV in factors they weren't
Speaker 1: all gay, right that women start to get HIV very
Speaker 1: soon after that, and so you know, there's thousands of
Speaker 1: people who died because of lack of guidance around using
Speaker 1: this cheap and repurpose drug BACKTROM. And the thoughts were
Speaker 1: that they were testing some other for profit drugs and
Speaker 1: they were looking for new HIV anti virals, and at
Speaker 1: one point some ludicrous public health fish actually said, oh,
Speaker 1: now that we have a zy t you won't need
Speaker 1: backtroom for for p JP because they thought they had
Speaker 1: a cure for it. I mean, the whole thing is crazy.
Speaker 1: But the point is, frontline docks knew what was working.
Speaker 1: They didn't need a big randomized control trial. They knew
Speaker 1: something was effective. Um, they knew the mechanisms, and yet
Speaker 1: you didn't get the agencies listening to them and following
Speaker 1: their guidance. Iver Mecton is the same frontline docks have
Speaker 1: long known in this pandemic, from as early as last year,
Speaker 1: um in March and April. Those who started using it,
Speaker 1: they've known that this was wickedly effective as this virus,
Speaker 1: and that number of docs who have understood that is
Speaker 1: increasing and increasing and increasing, and in this country it's increasing.
Speaker 1: So sort of put things in context. What I call farmageddon, right,
Speaker 1: so what's today today is like September or twenty two
Speaker 1: or something. You know, farm agedting started like two and
Speaker 1: a half weeks ago, and it's it's what I call
Speaker 1: this just insane battle against iber macta, which hit the
Speaker 1: media and the late night shows and all of those
Speaker 1: horse paste articles and all of these attacks right as
Speaker 1: this you know, people eating horse paste and it's an
Speaker 1: animal drug and all of this insane stuff. You know,
Speaker 1: what triggered that. What triggered that was that the prescriptions
Speaker 1: for iver mectin in this country, we're going through the
Speaker 1: roof doctors and patients were learning that this is highly
Speaker 1: effective against COVID, and so what happened is, you know,
Speaker 1: now now we're an all out war and it's really
Speaker 1: a war on people and the doctors who know that
Speaker 1: there's an effective cheap drugs. You know, cheapness is by
Speaker 1: the way, it costs six cents for a twelve milligram
Speaker 1: tablet to make six cents, and so you know that's
Speaker 1: the parallel is that again they want to they want
Speaker 1: to have some four for profit drugs to treat this illness.
Speaker 1: They want to make room for the for profit drugs.
Speaker 1: And if you if you if aver metin uh, you know,
Speaker 1: gets thrown in, you're not gonna you're gonna dry up
Speaker 1: anything for all those other drugs. Well, and it's also
Speaker 1: a war on the truth as well. I mean, YouTube
Speaker 1: has taken down some of your videos. Facebook has blocked
Speaker 1: some of your content as well. I mean, what's your
Speaker 1: response to that censorship at this point? Unsurprised? I mean,
Speaker 1: I totally understand why they're doing it. I mean, it's
Speaker 1: all of the actions are with one goal. Is they
Speaker 1: really need to suppress iver mactin again, you know, going
Speaker 1: back to the same thing. The opposition iver mectin is
Speaker 1: so vast, so deep, so wide ranging that it I mean,
Speaker 1: it's this little cheap repurpose drug and it's getting you know,
Speaker 1: part of us. Like we kind of chuckled because we're
Speaker 1: like when we see the bazookas that they're bringing out, Like,
Speaker 1: like I said, this form again, Like we know it's
Speaker 1: because because it works, right. If it didn't work, do
Speaker 1: you think they'd have to do all this. No, we
Speaker 1: wouldn't care because it doesn't work. Right. They know it works.
Speaker 1: That's why you're seeing a war on it. What's been
Speaker 1: the impact of all this on you? For for because
Speaker 1: as you mentioned, you know front log doctors of the
Speaker 1: people we should be listening. You've been on the front
Speaker 1: lines fighting COVID and I see unit units. What's been
Speaker 1: this response on you just professionally and personally as you've
Speaker 1: kind of been demonized by people in some of your peers, Like,
Speaker 1: what's the cost for speaking out? The personal cost on me? Um?
Speaker 1: Who you know, I'm exhausted. I'm just exhausted all the time. Um,
Speaker 1: I you know, it's it's it's been really infuriating. It's said,
Speaker 1: it's distress, and it's a lot of negative things. But
Speaker 1: at the same time, you know, I've gotten to build
Speaker 1: like a network of colleagues and relationships of like minded
Speaker 1: doctors who know the truth and are fighting for the truth.
Speaker 1: And so like my organization right which is called the
Speaker 1: Frontline COVID nineteen Critical Caroliniance or the fl c c C.
Speaker 1: You know, there are little f l c c c
Speaker 1: s all over the world, like Canada has one, UK
Speaker 1: has one, and like I know, all the doctors and
Speaker 1: scientists and all those organizations who understand the truth, they're
Speaker 1: all fighting against the regulatory agencies and in all of
Speaker 1: their countries. And so the relationships that I've built, the
Speaker 1: amount that I've learned has been like really really satisfying.
Speaker 1: And then most importantly is like despite all of the attacks,
Speaker 1: they said, generally people that were like whose lives are saved,
Speaker 1: how many people who like turn around on the dime?
Speaker 1: I mean, how many people have aid hospitalization? I mean
Speaker 1: it's literally hundreds of thousands, not millions, around the world.
Speaker 1: And I even can't get my head around that. Um,
Speaker 1: And that's why we do what we do, and and
Speaker 1: we know, you know, you know, like a friend told
Speaker 1: me last week, and I really like to stay and
Speaker 1: he said, there's only three things that are guaranteed to
Speaker 1: come out, the sun, the moon, and the truth. And
Speaker 1: the problem with the truth in this respect is that, Um,
Speaker 1: it's taking a while for this truth to come out,
Speaker 1: but it's coming. I mean, this, this um Udoburdust story
Speaker 1: cannot be kept on the wraps for too long. And
Speaker 1: there's been similar stories like Mexico City emptied their hospitals
Speaker 1: last winter with an early test and treatment program. That
Speaker 1: paper is out, um, I mean, and like I said,
Speaker 1: the prescriptions in this country, despite from again of two
Speaker 1: and a half weeks of attacks on it, are increasing,
Speaker 1: you know, like that the people are understanding that there
Speaker 1: is an effective drug, and they're you know, the doctors
Speaker 1: are now understanding and so um, I'm really encouraged, but
Speaker 1: the attacks are really tiresome, and the lies, the constant
Speaker 1: lies everywhere and misrepresentations and the implications of that is
Speaker 1: I'm somewhat numb to it now because like I've used
Speaker 1: to the fact that people are going to be dying
Speaker 1: and they're going to continue to die as a result
Speaker 1: of this suppression of a scientific truth, which is this
Speaker 1: is a highly effective medicine COVID. It's also just all
Speaker 1: bizarre because if you think the interest was saving lives,
Speaker 1: you would want and all of the above approach right
Speaker 1: to try to use, you know, to to use everything
Speaker 1: in the fight against COVID, and instead it's like you
Speaker 1: take the vaccine or else. So it's it's it's it's
Speaker 1: very bizarre. I don't know if you know who Brett
Speaker 1: Weinstart is, but he's this evolutionary biologist and I've gotten
Speaker 1: to be friends with him and I did a podcast
Speaker 1: with him. But you know, he talks about like when
Speaker 1: you look at the anomalies, you know, the the baron
Speaker 1: sees the abnormality, abnormal sort of actions that are being taken.
Speaker 1: You know, you really have to wonder like, what's what's
Speaker 1: going on here? Right, So the fact that they don't
Speaker 1: adopt and they're fighting against an early treatment which we
Speaker 1: know should be paired with the vaccines, right, it's not
Speaker 1: necessarily an enemy. You can use it, you know, in
Speaker 1: all hands on deck approach and really try to, you know,
Speaker 1: go after this pandemic with everything you have. That's one abnormality.
Speaker 1: The other one that's really bizarre, is this is this
Speaker 1: overwhelming obsession with vaccinating and vaccinating those who had the illness, right,
Speaker 1: and so it's just there's some things that aren't making sense, right,
Speaker 1: and so it you know, and then you have to
Speaker 1: wonder what drives those behaviors. And I gotta tell you
Speaker 1: it comes back to the same thing that these agencies
Speaker 1: are captured. They're not acting in the best interest, that
Speaker 1: the public health of the citizens is not primary. And
Speaker 1: I have to tell you something. I went into this
Speaker 1: pandemic actually trusting that that was their primary goal and
Speaker 1: that's their only interest. And I'll tell you this, I
Speaker 1: think many people who work in those agencies actually do
Speaker 1: believe that, and those are their careers and that is
Speaker 1: their goal. But they're not the leaders. And I think
Speaker 1: to become, you know, on the top of those agencies
Speaker 1: and actually direct to make the final decisions, you don't
Speaker 1: get there by doing the right thing and saying the
Speaker 1: right thing. I think you only get there if you
Speaker 1: know how to play well with the pharmaceutical companies. And and
Speaker 1: and that's that's the tragedy is I don't want to
Speaker 1: impugne you know, all of the fine people who work
Speaker 1: in those agencies. But I will tell you the ultimate
Speaker 1: direction of those agencies are certainly not influenced of the
Speaker 1: public health as as the primary goal. It doesn't make
Speaker 1: sense that the behaviors do not line up to suggest that. Well.
Speaker 1: It also, you know, a lot of this seems political
Speaker 1: in the sense of, you know, you had the White
Speaker 1: House pushed boosters before the FDA had you even voted
Speaker 1: or given approval to the booster shots, and then you
Speaker 1: had to top two top people. The FDI stepped down
Speaker 1: or f d A rather step down because of that.
Speaker 1: So it seems like it's more, you know, Joe Biden
Speaker 1: wants to hit ex percentage of Americans have been vaccinated
Speaker 1: for political purposes verse, you know, versus is this really
Speaker 1: in the best interest of all I've just been like
Speaker 1: lamenting for months, like where are the whistleblowers? I mean,
Speaker 1: you know, there's some of them have come out and
Speaker 1: you know there there is you know, one that came
Speaker 1: out in Organ, Arkansas. They have a lawyer and there's
Speaker 1: a lawsuit there. You know, the f d A, the
Speaker 1: two FDA officials you know resigning. I mean, I think
Speaker 1: that's almost almost like blowing a whistle that you know
Speaker 1: things are not right. I mean, UM, I just think
Speaker 1: we need more UM. And that's the other said truth
Speaker 1: is that you know, I spoke out. I've left two jobs.
Speaker 1: One I resigned from the other one I was essentially
Speaker 1: forced to resign because they were going to really just
Speaker 1: take away all of my First Amendment rights. And I said,
Speaker 1: I'm not gonna, not gonna subject myself to that. But
Speaker 1: you know, what I've learned is I don't want to
Speaker 1: put people down this, but very few people are willing
Speaker 1: to walk away from a job and their livelihoods. And
Speaker 1: and I just find that said, I know, there's a
Speaker 1: lot of people who know the truth in those agencies,
Speaker 1: and and very few are coming out. They don't want
Speaker 1: to blow up their careers. And I get that. So
Speaker 1: you got COVID. Were you taking ivermectin at the time
Speaker 1: or did you use it? Yeah? Yeah, So here's the thing, right,
Speaker 1: So I've been attacked for that as well. Oh, this
Speaker 1: jerk you know is saying that it's preventive against COVID.
Speaker 1: He got COVID. Listen, I am open and honest. So
Speaker 1: what happened was, UM, we were doing once a week
Speaker 1: of profil axis and UM, I actually got I was
Speaker 1: like the eighth day I hadn't taken it, and I
Speaker 1: got it like right around there. I was probably exposed
Speaker 1: on day six or seven since my last dose. But
Speaker 1: the same day that I got sick, I got my
Speaker 1: first reports in like seven months of breakthroughs. And what
Speaker 1: what the thing is is delta variant has two d
Speaker 1: and fifty times the viral load of the prior variants.
Speaker 1: I mean, it's got this huge viral burden. That's why
Speaker 1: it's so wickedly transmissible. It's one of the reasons. And
Speaker 1: you know, the tire the viral burden, the more the
Speaker 1: higher the dose you need to combat it. And so
Speaker 1: what we found is we needed to change our strategy.
Speaker 1: And so although we had breakthroughs, we also found So
Speaker 1: I have colleagues in Brazil who have been using profile
Speaker 1: access and they say, UM, let me tell you a
Speaker 1: really cool anecdote. So one of um one of our
Speaker 1: newest members of the FLCCC is this incredible research or
Speaker 1: clinician from Brazil's Flavio Kata Johnny, and he's done a
Speaker 1: number of clinical trials on a bunch of different molecules
Speaker 1: in um in, in COVID, he's made some really great discoveries,
Speaker 1: but he led a medical mission. He left the capital.
Speaker 1: They were doing the research and clinical missions throughout the Amazon,
Speaker 1: and they were visiting city after city during the time
Speaker 1: of what's called the Gamma variant. And if you've heard
Speaker 1: of the gamma variant, you probably haven't heard of it
Speaker 1: because it's really just been down in Brazil and in
Speaker 1: parts of South America. But it's extremely violent, meaning it
Speaker 1: moves fast, like from the first symptom to like wide
Speaker 1: it out lungs and meeting hospital in high it's of oxygen.
Speaker 1: Sometimes it's two to three days, and so it's really
Speaker 1: a wicked one. And they were doing very well with
Speaker 1: combination therapies, and then when gamma came, they started really
Speaker 1: losing patients and they had to learn and you know,
Speaker 1: they had figured out some different treatment strategy. But here's
Speaker 1: the thing. They're traveling through the Amazon and they're literally
Speaker 1: seeing cities and hospitals under collapse. City after city that
Speaker 1: they visit, you know, running out of oxygen, full of
Speaker 1: hospitals of capacity, many people dying. And then they visit
Speaker 1: this city called Kari I think it's c O A
Speaker 1: r I. And they get there, and they see that
Speaker 1: the hospital is like not overwhelmed, it's not that crazy,
Speaker 1: and it's very different from all the other cities they visited.
Speaker 1: And so he's talking to the health minister all of
Speaker 1: that city and she's being a little evasive, and finally
Speaker 1: she like admits to him that for many, many weeks
Speaker 1: they had been distributing iv mect into the city's popular lation,
Speaker 1: not only in prevention, but in treatment. And what was
Speaker 1: interesting is many people were taking it in prevention. There
Speaker 1: was still a lot of cases. There was still a
Speaker 1: lot of cases there, but they were all generally mild
Speaker 1: and very few needed the hospital. So almost uniformly they
Speaker 1: would avoid hospital if you were on. I met them beforehand,
Speaker 1: so it's not like that they didn't see cases. And
Speaker 1: that was even a wilder variant than delta. And also
Speaker 1: they weren't act They were taking it like every seven
Speaker 1: to ten days and not a very big dose. And
Speaker 1: so I'm just saying that that, like, to get sick
Speaker 1: while you're on ivermectin can happen, but it's generally mild,
Speaker 1: and so it's still quite preventative, so it avoids severe disease.
Speaker 1: And so um, when I got it. I have to
Speaker 1: tell you that, you know, I wasn't going to hide
Speaker 1: that fact. I thought it was I had a moral
Speaker 1: and ethical responsibility to say, you know what I was
Speaker 1: on prevention and I got sick. And what we were
Speaker 1: taking from this is we need a higher dose or
Speaker 1: higher frequency, and so we we now moved our protical
Speaker 1: to take twice a week for prevention. And so anyway,
Speaker 1: that's my story on on prevention and with these new
Speaker 1: more violent variants quick break more and ivermectin. After the
Speaker 1: commercial break you mentioned, I want to talk to you
Speaker 1: about it. The hospital and i CU capacity, So that's
Speaker 1: been a big reference point throughout the entire you know,
Speaker 1: pandemic with COVID is talking about hospitals and i C
Speaker 1: units across the country recent capacity. But don't I mean,
Speaker 1: I guess where I struggle to find the truth on
Speaker 1: this is don't most hospitals and IC units operate almost
Speaker 1: New York capacity for resource purposes even before COVID. Yeah, like,
Speaker 1: I guess how much of that story is true. Let
Speaker 1: me talk about what happened in New York last year.
Speaker 1: So when New York at its first surge, that literally
Speaker 1: was hospitals overwhelmed, and it was something I'll never forget.
Speaker 1: So I used to be the critical care service chief
Speaker 1: and the director of the I see it University of Wisconsin.
Speaker 1: But I'm a New Yorker, and I actually resigned from
Speaker 1: the University Wisconsin to go back to New York because
Speaker 1: they were they were just getting crushed and they needed intensivenests. Um.
Speaker 1: And I went back and what I saw was literally
Speaker 1: hospitals way over capacity. UM. You know, there was one
Speaker 1: system in New York that going into that surge, they
Speaker 1: had n operational I c you beds, and in two
Speaker 1: and a half weeks they had to create three, D
Speaker 1: and fifty And you don't have enough. I see specialists,
Speaker 1: you don't have enough. I see nurses and say, they
Speaker 1: are all sorts of doctors and nurses who are an
Speaker 1: unfamiliar with critical care having to manage I see you
Speaker 1: bed So that was clearly a point and a surge
Speaker 1: that overwhelmed systems. Now what is going on now at
Speaker 1: the delta variant? So um, since that early time, different
Speaker 1: hospitals now know how to scale capacity a little bit UM.
Speaker 1: And so for instance, a hospital that I worked at,
Speaker 1: now they built a dedicated that I see you for COVID,
Speaker 1: and we were pretty full in July. We had a
Speaker 1: lull in August um where we actually emptied that COVID
Speaker 1: I see you, and so we only had a few
Speaker 1: other patients in the main I see you. And now
Speaker 1: that one's full again, but we're managing it. We're not overwhelmed.
Speaker 1: But there's some capacity that was able to be absorbed.
Speaker 1: And so I think a lot of hospitals able to
Speaker 1: absorb some of the excess capacity through the new search.
Speaker 1: Because this is not our first rodeo now right, We've
Speaker 1: been doing this for a while. But I do have
Speaker 1: colleagues like for instance, in Tennessee, like in August and
Speaker 1: Joy in August, they literally were overwhelmed. They said they
Speaker 1: had no more I see you beds. They you know,
Speaker 1: they were you know, many many kids were going to
Speaker 1: the hospital. Like the things that we're hearing from close
Speaker 1: colleagues were really really bad. Um. But now that's lessening, right,
Speaker 1: So they're like surges happening and then they recede, and
Speaker 1: I think some hospitals know how to absorb or now
Speaker 1: scale a little bit to capacity. But to your other question,
Speaker 1: which is, you know, in normal times, don't we usually
Speaker 1: have full I cus And here's the interesting part about that.
Speaker 1: So as a physician, one of my core responsibilities to
Speaker 1: decide who needs I See you or not. When we
Speaker 1: have empty beds, I'm allowed to be a little bit
Speaker 1: more liberal. So if I go see a patient and
Speaker 1: they're kind of sick, I'm somewhat worried about them. You know,
Speaker 1: I'll put them in the I See you. If I
Speaker 1: have a lot of capacity, I'm just an abundance of caution.
Speaker 1: But if we're really full, and I go see a
Speaker 1: patient sometimes on the regular medical wards, even if they
Speaker 1: look kind of quite ill, you know, sometimes I don't
Speaker 1: take them. And so you can see what I'm saying.
Speaker 1: So it's like what happens in COVID is like we
Speaker 1: were managing increasingly, Like at for instance, in New York,
Speaker 1: the acuity level on the regular hospital floors that we're managing,
Speaker 1: we're we're light years beyond what UM I had seen
Speaker 1: in my career. We were leaving very sick patients out
Speaker 1: of the I see you, um and so again. And
Speaker 1: in fact, you know, I teach medicine. A lot of
Speaker 1: my trainees in my specialty, I was telling them, I'm
Speaker 1: like what you're learning here is not what I learned.
Speaker 1: I said, you know, and they understood. I said, we
Speaker 1: usually do not leave these kind of severely ill patients
Speaker 1: and regular medical wards. And so so that's the point
Speaker 1: you don't see, like on the ground level, we're making
Speaker 1: clinical decisions according to capacity. And so I don't know,
Speaker 1: is that a party answer to your question, it's it's
Speaker 1: a complicated one. Yeah, so it's it's nuanced. Is basically
Speaker 1: it's nuance, very nuanced. Yeah, let's take a break and
Speaker 1: then back to Dr Corey. COVID vaccines. They're the fastest
Speaker 1: vaccines ever created, improved ever. You know previously, I think
Speaker 1: the vaccine the fastest vaccine to go from development to
Speaker 1: deployment was the Mom's vaccine in the nineteen sixties. That
Speaker 1: took four years. I mean, you get a vaccine through
Speaker 1: the approval process without cutting corners that quickly. I can
Speaker 1: just say it's on an unprecedented speed. And you know,
Speaker 1: with medicineism, anything with science, with speed, you raise the
Speaker 1: risk of making errors. And and that's all I'm gonna say.
Speaker 1: I'm not a vaccine expert, but yes, I think your
Speaker 1: statement is true. It's extremely fast and Um, you know,
Speaker 1: what I actually believe is that speed in which they
Speaker 1: developed and rolled them out might have been reasonable in
Speaker 1: the fog of war, right, like we were in a
Speaker 1: really tough time, especially last winter. Um. But I also
Speaker 1: think that, you know, with time, you need to continue
Speaker 1: to collect the data on efficacy and safety and that
Speaker 1: should be transparent. And my only issue with the vaccines
Speaker 1: and the data is I just don't find the data transparent.
Speaker 1: They're not sharing it. It's all in newspaper articles, and
Speaker 1: it's very unsatisfied to someone who you know, I I
Speaker 1: like to look and analyze data, and so do my colleagues,
Speaker 1: and were just it's we see a lot of talk
Speaker 1: of the data, but we don't actually see the data,
Speaker 1: and so that's my concern. But I think that's that's
Speaker 1: the key, is that you need to contin need to
Speaker 1: look at data. I mean, they did a rush last year,
Speaker 1: but um, you know, continue to look at data, but
Speaker 1: provide the data, that's the other thing. So that's all
Speaker 1: I'll say about that. Well, and to your point, you know,
Speaker 1: I support right to try, So I support trying to
Speaker 1: get the vaccine to market under emergency use authorization for
Speaker 1: you know, an eighty five year old who could die
Speaker 1: if they get COVID. But now we're forcing the vaccine
Speaker 1: on you know, so many people around the country who
Speaker 1: probably don't need the vaccine, and also only one of
Speaker 1: them has even been approved, and then that approval process
Speaker 1: was incredibly fast. Yet we're forcing Americans to get the vaccine.
Speaker 1: It's just insane to me. And to your point about
Speaker 1: the transparency regarding you know, deaths and and vaccine injury,
Speaker 1: I mean, like they I know, there's you know, people
Speaker 1: try to condemn Varius. However, the CDC and the government
Speaker 1: uses it as an early reporting system, so it does
Speaker 1: have benefit. And then it is also a good comparison
Speaker 1: tool to look at deaths and injury from COVID vaccines
Speaker 1: versus other ones, because if you think the information is
Speaker 1: skewed for COVID, it would be skewed for everything. So
Speaker 1: we've seen you know, seven thousand reports of death from
Speaker 1: the COVID vaccine. Again, it's soef reporting. The information has
Speaker 1: not been you know, entirely examined, so you have to
Speaker 1: take it with a grain assault. But you know, we've
Speaker 1: also seen recent studies showing heart problems are a much
Speaker 1: bigger risk than previously thought, you know, how much vaccine
Speaker 1: injury are are using in the hospital, in the ICU
Speaker 1: or some of your colleagues. You know, that's a hard
Speaker 1: number from from a one person perspective, And but I
Speaker 1: certainly have seen a number of um very severe blood
Speaker 1: clots so that have occurred within the weeks after a vaccine.
Speaker 1: And then you know what I've been concerned about is
Speaker 1: I've had a number of cases in the last month
Speaker 1: or two where an elderly patient like came in with
Speaker 1: like a pneumonia, which is very common many people diet
Speaker 1: inder theives with pneumonia and or sepsis, And so they
Speaker 1: came in with these conditions that are rather normal for
Speaker 1: me to take care of in the elderly, but the
Speaker 1: families would like spontaneously tell me that he wasn't the
Speaker 1: same since the vaccine, or like he he seemed to be,
Speaker 1: you know, dwindling or not not the same in his health,
Speaker 1: seemed to suffer. And you know, I just found that
Speaker 1: concerning that the families would would notice that that they
Speaker 1: saw people so like they didn't die of a vaccine injury,
Speaker 1: but it seemed like something predisposed them to have the
Speaker 1: illness that brought them before me. And again I can't
Speaker 1: say how common that is, but I've I've definitely seen
Speaker 1: cases of that, so you know, asking an individual doctor
Speaker 1: and then you know as an outpatient. I've definitely had
Speaker 1: people in my circle and uh you know through friends
Speaker 1: and family network who have who have definitely come to
Speaker 1: me with um, you know, problems after vaccines. But again
Speaker 1: that's hard to quantity or put into context. I mean
Speaker 1: I've had I went to go get an antibody test.
Speaker 1: I won't say where, but I had two of the
Speaker 1: nurses I talked to so that they were saying an
Speaker 1: increase in hard injury from the vaccine, particularly at young people.
Speaker 1: So I just I just don't think. I just don't
Speaker 1: think that we're being told the truth about all this.
Speaker 1: And I'm not I'm not anti the COVID vaccine. I'm not.
Speaker 1: I'm not I'm not for or against anything. I'm just
Speaker 1: for the truth. And I just don't feel like we're
Speaker 1: yeah for data and the truth, and I just don't
Speaker 1: feel like we're getting it from people. And I certainly
Speaker 1: certainly don't think anyone should be mandated for sake of
Speaker 1: having a job to get something that one you know,
Speaker 1: three of the vaccines or no, two of the three
Speaker 1: aren't even FDA proved, and then the other has been
Speaker 1: rushed through, and then we have no one. You know,
Speaker 1: we're not really getting the real truth about potential injury.
Speaker 1: It just should not be mandated on anyone. I just
Speaker 1: think that's disgusting. And my concerns is that all the data,
Speaker 1: whatever data is being shared um is actually artificial, because
Speaker 1: all the data on efficacy and safety and everything, it's
Speaker 1: artificial because you're not including effective early treatment options in
Speaker 1: the equation. So so like if people could get treatment
Speaker 1: with you know, early treatment, the effects of the vaccine
Speaker 1: would be much less impressive, you know, like the story
Speaker 1: I told you whether you know, even though there were cases,
Speaker 1: very few went to hospital, and so, you know, I
Speaker 1: just feel like we're not getting a full picture of
Speaker 1: the way in which you can address this illness. So
Speaker 1: this this maniacal singular focus on vaccines, you know, as
Speaker 1: as the only way to end the pandemic. It's ignoring
Speaker 1: the fact that there are other options that we're not using.
Speaker 1: And so um again, I'm for early treatment. And you know,
Speaker 1: the other thing I want to tell you say is
Speaker 1: that what's fascinating as a physician in this pandemic is
Speaker 1: I've remectin is not the only thing that works early on.
Speaker 1: There's a number of other compounds and molecules that are
Speaker 1: really effective early on. There's actually another anti parasite drug
Speaker 1: which is highly effected called nittas oxinide um. There are
Speaker 1: anti viral nasal drops and mouth washes that you can
Speaker 1: do because all the viral burden is actually in the
Speaker 1: nose and pharynx and like throat, and you can actually
Speaker 1: kind of sanitize or sterilize those areas with varicidal which
Speaker 1: is like virus killing solutions, and that alters trajectory incredibly.
Speaker 1: There's a number of studies showing that the hospitalization rates
Speaker 1: if you do regular like povid on iodine nasal drops
Speaker 1: um with with these versible mouthwashes, I mean, they're like
Speaker 1: twenty times less than if you didn't. And so there's
Speaker 1: there's just a bunch of approaches. And now now we
Speaker 1: have like new medicines that suppress androgen activity, which is
Speaker 1: like testosterone because what we recognize that covid is men
Speaker 1: fare a lot worse at almost every age group um.
Speaker 1: In fact, men between the ages of forty to forty
Speaker 1: nine or six times more likely to die than women
Speaker 1: of COVID, and between thirty and fifty they're like two
Speaker 1: to three times more likely to be hospitalized. And the
Speaker 1: reason why that is is that testosterone and its derivatives
Speaker 1: actually drive an enzyme which allows the virus to enter,
Speaker 1: and that's why men do worse. And so there are
Speaker 1: these incredible trials coming out of Brazil old in other
Speaker 1: areas showing that if you use medicines which suppress the phosterone,
Speaker 1: the patients do incredibly well, even in women. And so
Speaker 1: I just want to make sure that like we use
Speaker 1: the combination of therapies. Our protocols are on our website
Speaker 1: um F L c CC dot MET in case your
Speaker 1: audience is interested in looking at our treatment protocols. But
Speaker 1: they're they're highly evidence based and highly effective um and
Speaker 1: we learned from a network of colleagues who have done
Speaker 1: research and have gained clinical experience, and so, you know,
Speaker 1: I just want to point out early tearing right now. Today,
Speaker 1: the NAH does not have an early treatment option. They
Speaker 1: don't even recommend vitamin D even though their their own
Speaker 1: data over decades shows that vitamin D is uh, you know,
Speaker 1: vitamin D deficiency is highly common in the U S population,
Speaker 1: especially in the poor uh and disadvantage in minority populations,
Speaker 1: and so they don't even recommend vitamin D. It's it's
Speaker 1: really again another incredible anomaly of how they're approaching this well.
Speaker 1: And another reason em against the vaccine mandates is because
Speaker 1: COVID impacts different groups of people. There's such a disparity
Speaker 1: and the way it impacts people, you know, young versus old.
Speaker 1: You know, you start to get over the age of eight,
Speaker 1: it starts to get you know, a lot more danger
Speaker 1: is if you're even my age three six ninety nine
Speaker 1: point nine seven percent chance of surviving different I tried.
Speaker 1: I tried, Dr Corey. So take us through what you know,
Speaker 1: especially from your experiences. What are the higher risk groups
Speaker 1: of people you know, who should be concerned, who less concerned?
Speaker 1: You know, take us through some of the different you
Speaker 1: know the risk calculation here. So number one age is
Speaker 1: what you mentioned, So we know with every ten years
Speaker 1: of age um it's a linear sort of plot on
Speaker 1: the graph, like a diagonally rising one. Like with every
Speaker 1: dec sile or ten years of age, the mortality increases.
Speaker 1: So definitely you don't want to be older and get
Speaker 1: this disease. The older you are, the worst you'll fair.
Speaker 1: That's number one, flat out. Number two is obesity, UM,
Speaker 1: and you know, the more overweight and obese you are,
Speaker 1: you're going to do worse. Number three, UM is diabetes,
Speaker 1: and you know those are diabetes which is actually causes
Speaker 1: the form of immuno suppression, they do worse. And so
Speaker 1: it's really obesity, which are obese is an you know,
Speaker 1: endemic in society and at least the US society and
Speaker 1: many others. UM. Diabetes type one or two is very
Speaker 1: common UM. And then obviously age. But those those are
Speaker 1: kind of the three the three ones that you sort
Speaker 1: of that I worry about, Like when I see someone
Speaker 1: really overweight with diabetes just coming with COVID or an
Speaker 1: elderly patient, you know, I know I'm going to have
Speaker 1: a rougher time and may not succeed at saving them,
Speaker 1: which is why you know, we should be kind of
Speaker 1: looking at the totality of all this and trying to
Speaker 1: figure out the best ways to both mitigate and then
Speaker 1: also to potentially save lives for people who get COVID.
Speaker 1: You know, we're also saying breakthrough cases with the vaccine
Speaker 1: is that something that's prevalent in the ice US in
Speaker 1: hospitals right now, or or people showing up with or
Speaker 1: with breakooth cases or that's like another thing that I've
Speaker 1: been bemoaning. The data on that is they're not sharing
Speaker 1: that data. So you know, we have officials in the
Speaker 1: CDC who've been running around saying that the people in
Speaker 1: hospital or vaccinated. That's not true. You know, they had
Speaker 1: data coming out of CDC that as of June, of
Speaker 1: the people in hospital, uh, we're vaccinated, right, and so UM,
Speaker 1: we know those numbers are higher in Israel. It's sixty
Speaker 1: of people in hospital have been double vaccinated. UM. A
Speaker 1: lot of my colleagues in the i c U over
Speaker 1: the last couple of months, they do say that almost
Speaker 1: everyone is unvaccinated. But that's changing and we know why
Speaker 1: that's changing, and it has to do with the timing
Speaker 1: of the vaccine. So Israel was the fastest out of
Speaker 1: the gate, and they're starting to see waning efficacy, right,
Speaker 1: and so I'm starting to see double vaccinated in the
Speaker 1: i c Now. I just had a patient last week, UM,
Speaker 1: double vaccinated, very sick in the I S you and so, UM,
Speaker 1: they do seem the data seems to suggest that you're
Speaker 1: much less likely to get severe disease, but it's not
Speaker 1: a guarantee. And that's the other thing. That's why early
Speaker 1: treatment matters. These you know, all of these people who
Speaker 1: have done the right thing, they've shown up for their shots,
Speaker 1: they've socially distanced and masked, and now they're getting sick
Speaker 1: and we're not giving them an option for treatment. I mean,
Speaker 1: it's really it's unconscionable. You know, the vaccinated amy non
Speaker 1: vaccinated will need treatment. And that's what you know, Florida
Speaker 1: has said as well, because they've been pushing the monoquoto
Speaker 1: antibody treatments and they're saying they've seen I think I
Speaker 1: believe one of the tweets I saw, you know, I
Speaker 1: believe this is true because this is just going off
Speaker 1: the top of my head. I think it was almost
Speaker 1: over where individuals were vaccinated who are still getting sick
Speaker 1: and they needed the monoclonal antibodies. Because again, it's just
Speaker 1: sort of this weird situation that we're in where it's
Speaker 1: like they were originally trying to deny and push back
Speaker 1: against monoclonal antibodies because they just want people to go
Speaker 1: get vaccinated. You have to get vaccinate. You have to
Speaker 1: get vaccinated. But but what's not being part of that
Speaker 1: conversation is what what about the people who get vaccinated
Speaker 1: and then still get really sick and neither life to
Speaker 1: be saved by you know, either the monoquote antibodies or
Speaker 1: you're saying ever macton or some of these other things.
Speaker 1: So it's like it's just it's just like it just
Speaker 1: blows my mind because there's just no rationale or any
Speaker 1: common sense anymore whatsoever. Again, you you're pointing out all
Speaker 1: of these things that just don't make rational sense. So
Speaker 1: and there's a lot of us right in society, smart
Speaker 1: people pay attention, and a lot of us have scratching
Speaker 1: their heads. And that's why when I when you see
Speaker 1: these behaviors which are inconsistent with sound medical principles and
Speaker 1: in fact seemed to violate them, right like this rush
Speaker 1: to vaccinate people who have already had the disease and
Speaker 1: mandate it even if you've had the illness and have antibodies.
Speaker 1: I mean, when have we ever done that in history?
Speaker 1: And so they're making up this new rule and it's
Speaker 1: it's it's bizarre, and so you're pointing out a lot
Speaker 1: of them, but but this early treatment one is the
Speaker 1: one that's actually causing the loss of life. That the
Speaker 1: continued suppression of early treatment options, which I maintain is
Speaker 1: being done until these new orl anti viwals can be
Speaker 1: rolled out by the big former companies. For every day
Speaker 1: that they continue to do that, we're going to lose
Speaker 1: a lot of people. And and they better hope those
Speaker 1: oil anti virals work, because I gotta tell you the
Speaker 1: one from Murk, it's called Moment Pure of Your already
Speaker 1: failed in the hospital. They tried it in the hospital,
Speaker 1: and that those trials failed, they're actually trying it now
Speaker 1: as an outpatient. And again I don't care about what
Speaker 1: that shows because we already have a highly effective drug
Speaker 1: and I remectin. But um, that's what I think has happening.
Speaker 1: They're waiting for those drugs to come in and save
Speaker 1: the day. But while they do that, I mean incalculable
Speaker 1: loss of life and morbidity, even and even if you survived.
Speaker 1: The poor people with long haul COVID. I don't know
Speaker 1: if you have friends or family, but it's miserable long haul.
Speaker 1: I mean that that's a whole other epidemic and itself
Speaker 1: and so and by the way, we have a protocol
Speaker 1: for that. How frequent is long haul in terms of
Speaker 1: you know, the people who get COVID you know, the
Speaker 1: the the incidents ranges, but anywhere from ten to fifty
Speaker 1: the general somewhere around thirty. That maybe a little high.
Speaker 1: But um, that's what we're seeing from, you know, which
Speaker 1: is lingering effects of some amount. Um. I were really
Speaker 1: about the more severe ones. You know, I've had like
Speaker 1: young people who like can't go back to work, twenty
Speaker 1: nine year old who's literally incapacitated, um, just with so
Speaker 1: much fatigue and dizziness and just feels unwell all the time.
Speaker 1: And and he's really sad because he's a very functional,
Speaker 1: very active guy, and he just Um, you know, that's
Speaker 1: one case. But you know, I've had others. Now, he
Speaker 1: we've done good work with him. He's actually been my
Speaker 1: least satisfactory case, because I've had numbers of other cases
Speaker 1: where on our protocol which is on our websites called
Speaker 1: I Recover, which is sent in around IV mectin and
Speaker 1: some other medicines. UM, we had just incredible responses. And
Speaker 1: also that protocol is for those who are vaccine injured.
Speaker 1: We have tremendous responses in vaccine injury because you know,
Speaker 1: i've remectin right. One of the thoughts of why it's
Speaker 1: so effective is that it's it's it's a drug that's
Speaker 1: sought to tightly bind to the spike protein, and that's
Speaker 1: why it prevents entry. So if it binds, it can't
Speaker 1: enter the cell, it can't replicate, and that's why it's
Speaker 1: a good prevention. And because the vaccines, right, they tell
Speaker 1: the self to make spike protein, i've mectan actually binds
Speaker 1: to the spike protein, and so what we think is
Speaker 1: happening in the vaccine injury is that the spike protein
Speaker 1: is leaving the tissue of the arm and circulating and
Speaker 1: causing all of these you know, other symptoms. And if
Speaker 1: you give them ivermectin, they really respond. In fact, some
Speaker 1: of them A little satisfying clinical experiences has been treating
Speaker 1: patients who really felt unwell after the vaccine. And so um,
Speaker 1: I think your your audience and you know, anyone out
Speaker 1: there has longhould, they should go to our website and
Speaker 1: look at their protocol for that well. And I think too,
Speaker 1: you know, just for the you know, what sort of
Speaker 1: underscores how dumb their public health officials are and the
Speaker 1: people in charge, is how much they're undermining their own
Speaker 1: message with vaccines, because if you're essentially saying unvaccinated people
Speaker 1: or the enemy, you have to fear them while simultaneously
Speaker 1: telling us how great the vaccines are and somehow prevents
Speaker 1: them from severe illness. That that doesn't that doesn't really correlate, right,
Speaker 1: or that that doesn't really square right. You can't you can't.
Speaker 1: You can't say unvaccinated people or the enemy, and you
Speaker 1: have to fear them while also saying somehow vaccines are
Speaker 1: going to protect and save lives, and that just doesn't
Speaker 1: that doesn't track. So it's uh, it's so, it's you know,
Speaker 1: so for any anything else we're missing in this conversation
Speaker 1: that you want the folks listening to to know, No,
Speaker 1: I just want to give, like you know, I don't
Speaker 1: want to sound too hold to it, really a message
Speaker 1: of hope because you know, like I said, a stark
Speaker 1: achievement in public health has been realized in Utar Pradesh.
Speaker 1: They should be the model for the world. Um, just
Speaker 1: like Mexico City's Department of Health I M s S.
Speaker 1: They also could be a model for the world. I mean,
Speaker 1: we know how to solve this pandemic. So that's the
Speaker 1: positive message. UM. The tragedy is that we live in
Speaker 1: a very capitalistic societyist run on on profit motives and
Speaker 1: and unfortunately we have agencies that are captured regulatory capture
Speaker 1: by those with financial interests and and and that's why
Speaker 1: you're seeing the US have such a tough time with
Speaker 1: this pandemic. I mean, we're getting hammered here and and
Speaker 1: I you know, my organization, although we're a group of
Speaker 1: doctors and researchers, UM, we've had to learn to do grassroots,
Speaker 1: meaning you know, our normal dissemination of our knowledge was
Speaker 1: not working. Lecturing and publishing papers. We've published a dozen
Speaker 1: actually two dozen if you count the group. It just
Speaker 1: wasn't registering. And so we found that this was a
Speaker 1: life saving medicine, and so we tried to bring it,
Speaker 1: you know, with a website and press conference and I
Speaker 1: gave that testimony which luckily went viral and they got
Speaker 1: an important message out and we've continued to try to
Speaker 1: deliver that message. And so the message is good. There
Speaker 1: is a solution. There are treatments, UM, and UH, you've
Speaker 1: got to convince your doctors to learn about them and
Speaker 1: use them. Um. And it's working. Like I said, the
Speaker 1: prescriptions are going up, and so the early treatment message
Speaker 1: is getting out there. It's just it's really painful to
Speaker 1: see how slow it is and how much resistance to
Speaker 1: it is, which is which is going to be a
Speaker 1: historic humanitarian crisis. That was that that history will not
Speaker 1: be kind to these actions that you outline, Lisa, They
Speaker 1: will not be kind and resistance in terms of I
Speaker 1: mean there have been lawsuits of people suing on behalf
Speaker 1: of family members, suing hospitals who won't provide iver met
Speaker 1: done and things like that. So to the point where
Speaker 1: it's become you know, people have taken legal action to
Speaker 1: try to because they weren't able to get the prescription
Speaker 1: or they weren't able to get it. So you've mentioned
Speaker 1: uh and you're president founding member of the nonprofit called
Speaker 1: Frontline COVID nineteen Critical Carolines. You've mentioned it throughout the show. Again,
Speaker 1: where can people go to find this information to support
Speaker 1: you to read some of the work. Yeah, So it's
Speaker 1: f l c CC dot net UM and you know
Speaker 1: it was originally founded by Professor Paul Marrick, who was
Speaker 1: my dear friend and colleague and mentor of mine. And
Speaker 1: you know, he was tasked, you know, asked a year ago,
Speaker 1: you know, why don't you put together a protocols. He's
Speaker 1: famous for his sepsis protocols UM and he's a giant
Speaker 1: in medicine. He's the most published practicing intensivist in the
Speaker 1: world and the history of critical care medicine, and and
Speaker 1: all of us are well published and very well known.
Speaker 1: And we got together and we just have consumed everything COVID,
Speaker 1: and all we've tried to do is put together as
Speaker 1: effective treatment protocols we have, we can, and we have,
Speaker 1: and but our message and our expertise is being attacked
Speaker 1: and suppressed and it's it's said, but we'll get there.
Speaker 1: F l c cc dot net that I mentioned, So
Speaker 1: f l ccc dot net is the website. Dr Corey.
Speaker 1: I appreciate your time. This was a fascinating, fascinating discussion. Yes,
Speaker 1: so thank you. I really appreciate the opportunity to share
Speaker 1: them what people really need to hear, and so I
Speaker 1: thank you for that. I want to bank Dr pire
Speaker 1: Corey again at for such a fascinating and informative interview,
Speaker 1: and I want to thank you guys at home so
Speaker 1: much for listening. If you enjoyed today's show, please leave
Speaker 1: us a review and rate us five stars and Apple Podcasts.
Speaker 1: You can also find me on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram
Speaker 1: and at least and rebooth. Special thanks to our producer
Speaker 1: John Cassio, writer Aaron Kleegman, and he also does a
Speaker 1: research and executive producers Debbie Myers and Speaker New Gingridge,
Speaker 1: all part of the Gingridge three sixty network and team