Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

They Denied A Lab Leak At Wuhan. They Are Wrong About Other Things Including the Availability of Inexpensive, Effective Covid-19 Treatments
Trial Site News ^ | 06/18/2021 | Mary Beth Pfeiffer

Posted on 06/18/2021 12:55:16 PM PDT by SeekAndFind

After months of denial, the U.S. government has acknowledged that the COVID-19 catastrophe may indeed have originated in a leak from a laboratory in Wuhan, China.

We are now allowed to talk about what until May 13 was a debunked conspiracy theory. Like many facets of the pandemic of our age, Wuhan was censored with the dreaded “disinformation” label, on Facebook and just about everywhere else. Not anymore.

The Wuhan debacle shows what happens when public health institutions have too much power, and the media plays mouthpiece rather than watchdog. Truth suffers. So does trust.

This commentary isn’t about the media’s wholesale buy-in of a possibly mythical pangolin that caused a pandemic.

This is about other potential Wuhans — issues that social and mainstream media have put to rest and closed to honest examination. We are told: Vaccines are safe. Lockdowns are just. We must protect, and be protected from, children. All those statements should be open to debate — and dispute.

I have spent the last eight months attacking another insidious COVID myth. It holds that there is no early treatment.

This actual disinformation has led to deaths and debility. In reporting it, the guardians of media have endowed public figures and institutions with wisdom they surely did not and do not have. Once definitive, Dr. Anthony Fauci of the National Institutes of Health and Dr. Tedros Ghebreyesus of the World Health Organization have reversed themselves on a potential Wuhan lab leak.

Then: “Extremely unlikely,” WHO said after a cursory probe.

Now: “Not convinced” the virus came from nature, said Fauci.

What else might they have gotten wrong?

‘Trusted’ News

Just months into the pandemic, research suggested that a handful of approved generic drugs could potentially quell COVID and save lives. By late last year, a safe drug that won its developers the Nobel Prize in Medicine in 2015 had risen to the top: ivermectin.

Fifty-eight trials now show this 40-year-old drug, off patent since 1997, greatly reduces the ravages of COVID. It lessens severity, lowers hospitalization, and saves lives. Significantly, it also prevents infection.

That few Americans know this is a direct result of two things: First is an unreasonably high, and shifting, bar set by the NIH, FDA and WHO, which collectively reject, cherry-pick or ignore what is now a trove of studies. Second is a media campaign that upholds the anti-IVM dictum, using charged language – from “controversial” to “snake oil” — that makes doctors, medical journals and other media fearful of backlash.

In a case of government propaganda, the Food and Drug Administration actually warned against ivermectin last spring, based, it said, on “multiple” people sickened by an animal formulation, which turned out to be four. Moreover, FDA admitted it “hadn’t studied” the considerable data then available on treatment with the human form.

As government failed us, mainstream and social media did something unique in modern history. Google, YouTube, Facebook, BBC, Washington Post, Associated Press, Reuters and others conspired to shape content and coverage in the government’s image.

They called it, ironically, the Trusted News Initiative. It existed to ferret out falsehoods and declare certainty in a rapidly changing information landscape. The media became a COVID fact-checking apparatus, devoid of nuance or meaningful investigation.

In the wake of Wuhan relevations, some outlets are now correcting the record.

Vaccine OR Treatment

From the start, there was no room for both vaccines and treatments under the statute that has allowed millions of Americans to be vaccinated with an unlicensed, largely unstudied substance. The key mechanism on which this turned was the vaccine’s “Emergency Use Authorization,” which can be granted by the FDA only if there is “no adequate, approved, and available alternative to the product for diagnosing, preventing or treating” a disease.

But even as the vaccine was minimally tested and maximally hyped, there was an alternative. Ivermectin.

“It’s the most effective antiviral agent we have,” Dr. Paul E. Marik, co-founder of Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance, said in a conversation for this article. “If the WHO was to say that or the NIH — were they to approve ivermectin — the EUA for all the vaccines would become invalid.”

Ivermectin, said FLCCC president Dr. Pierre Kory, “would kneecap the entire global vaccine policy around the world.”

The choice was always vaccines OR treatment. Not both. Operation Warp Speed spent three times as much — $18 billion — to develop a vaccine as it did to develop a treatment. Moreover, money for therapeutics went largely toward costly new drugs, some of which failed and others still in development.  

The media did not question the oversight of existing drugs and emerging research. Instead, it became an arm of government in a shared single fixed goal: Vaccinate quickly and at any expense.

A Year Lost

America’s COVID Czar Anthony Fauci predicted in July of 2020 that an antiviral would be available by that fall. Then, last December he said his “highest priority” was a quick-acting COVID drug. In reality, NIH waited until April 29, 2021 to announce a large study of safety-tested, FDA-approved drugs. That was roughly 400 days – and nearly 600,000 U.S. deaths — into the pandemic.

Forget a few dozen studies – most from other countries — that universally agreed on ivermectin’s efficacy. Forget a peer-reviewed meta-analysis that showed 83 percent fewer deaths. Forget the experiences of hundreds of real treating doctors in the U.S. and around the world.

Viewed in the kindest possible way, that delay, that lost year, wasn’t so much intentional as institutionalized. U.S. treatments are driven by the integral and outsized influence of pharmaceutical money on the regulatory process, and no one was putting up $20 million for what are considered, questionably, the “gold-standard” of evidence-based medicine: randomized control trials.

Dr. Robert Malone, a vaccine researcher and inventor of mRNA technology, went bankrupt trying to repurpose old antiviral drugs to treat the Zika virus in the 2010s. “The investment community had zero interest because there’s no way to make a buck,” he said in a must-see podcast on pandemic missteps. “The financial incentives around drug repurposing are such that it doesn’t get done.”

Ivermectin is the penicillin of COVID, particularly when combined with other generics like fluvoxamine and the vilified but effective hydroxychloroquine. Now, however, as at the start of COVID, newly infected patients are still denied treatment and turned back into the community, often to infect others.

As Malone put it, “We’re sending people home and telling them not to come back until your lips are blue.”

“Were this a hundred years ago,” a Pennsylvania ophthalmologist named Neil Chesin told me months ago, “and Ivermectin was available, it would be used everywhere.”

Media Sees No Evil

The dereliction of duty, by the New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal (with the Wuhan exception), Associated Press, USA Today and other media giants, likely cost many thousands of lives. The questions that were never asked, the issues never investigated, include:

–In April 2020, Fauci endorsed the high-priced anti-viral remdesivir, calling it the “standard of care” before the first study was published. Did anyone in those investigative powerhouses question the financial ties between the NIH and the drug’s maker, Gilead? Did they care that the study showed no mortality improvement, and the trial’s endpoint was changed to improve benefits so marginal that the WHO advises against the drug?

–Hospitals vehemently oppose ivermectin, forcing some patients’ families to obtain court orders to get it. Does this comport with their liberal use of treatments like monoclonal antibodies and convalescent plasma that are still considered experimental? Just 19 deaths were associated with ivermectin in 20 years; 503 were linked to remdesivir in its first year. Annualized, that’s roughly a 500-fold higher toll for remdesivir. Why is ivermectin — safe, FDA-approved — not used off-label, especially in dying ICU patients, when the potential harm is miniscule? 

–The COVID pandemic has led to the most widespread, government-sanctioned wave of censorship and authoritarian message control in American history. Rather than fighting this, the media carries the water. When Merck disingenuously disavowed ivermectin’s safety — a drug it gave away by the billion in a life-saving campaign against parasites — widespread media reports failed to note the company’s potential to make big money on patented new drugs on which it was already working.

–More importantly, the evidence in favor of ivermectin aligns so uniformly that the odds of it being wrong are infinitesimal. Why not read the studies? Why not talk to doctors who have used the drug and patients who have taken it?

The unholy alliance of media and money was foreshadowed at a 2016 conference on preparation for the next SARS epidemic. There, Peter Daszak, whose NIH funding for virus research in China is under scrutiny, emphasized the need to use the press. He is quoted in the proceedings:

“A key driver is the media, and the economics follow the hype. We need to use that hype to our advantage … Investors will respond if they see profit at the end of process, Daszak stated.”

So far, the hype has prevailed. But it can be wrong. Can we now talk about ivermectin?

***


Mary Beth Pfeiffer is an investigative journalist and author of two books. A list of her article links can be found here. Follow her on Twitter: @marybethpf.

Note that views expressed in this opinion article are the writer’s personal views and not necessarily those of TrialSite.


TOPICS: Health/Medicine; Science; Society
KEYWORDS: ivermectin; lableak; wuhan

1 posted on 06/18/2021 12:55:16 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o; tellw; Huskrrrr; Jane Long; Freedom'sWorthIt; Freedom56v2; BDParrish; Phx_RC; cba123; ..

Ping for your interest


2 posted on 06/18/2021 12:55:45 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

what a tangled weave these people have woven.

But we knew this before May 2021.


3 posted on 06/18/2021 12:58:17 PM PDT by hoe_cake (A Descendant of the Signers of the Constitution. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

They lied because.....Trump


4 posted on 06/18/2021 1:06:54 PM PDT by gattaca ("Government's first duty is to protect the people, not run their lives." Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

100,000 Americans died because Trump Haters banned effective medications for Covid19.

100,000.


5 posted on 06/18/2021 1:10:03 PM PDT by MattMusson (Sometimes the wind blows too much)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
America’s COVID Czar Anthony Fauci predicted in July of 2020 that an antiviral would be available by that fall. Then, last December he said his “highest priority” was a quick-acting COVID drug. In reality, NIH waited until April 29, 2021 to announce a large study of safety-tested, FDA-approved drugs. That was roughly 400 days – and nearly 600,000 U.S. deaths — into the pandemic.


This is a huge story. How many people died because partisan media and medical personnel who hated Trump, suppressed anecdotal information that the controversial anti-malarial drug hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) was useful in treating Wuhan flu. When I visited my physician and asked about HCQ, in June, 2020, he appeared not to have heard about it. Yet, at that time there was info out that it was somewhat effective.
6 posted on 06/18/2021 1:21:30 PM PDT by The_Media_never_lie (Political Correctness kills!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MattMusson

That’s a low-end estimate for the US only.


7 posted on 06/18/2021 1:28:02 PM PDT by absalom01 (You should do your duty in all things. You cannot do more, and you should never wish to do less.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: absalom01

How many do you think they were prepared to kill to get remove Trump?


8 posted on 06/18/2021 1:57:42 PM PDT by alternatives? (If our borders are not secure, why fund an army?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: alternatives?

All of us.


9 posted on 06/18/2021 2:03:01 PM PDT by absalom01 (You should do your duty in all things. You cannot do more, and you should never wish to do less.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

We The People America was an obstruction to the globalist oligarchy’s planned ‘new world order’, so ‘they’ just herded US and used the eager media whoredom to lie repeatedly to US. ‘They’ do not care how many of US die in their scheme, so get ready for the next phase of their great reset operation. Cyber crashes the norm and militarized police forces to enforce their one world government. Yes, it is demonic because ‘they’ are serving the demon who empowers them with his wealth and lusts.


10 posted on 06/18/2021 2:05:24 PM PDT by MHGinTN (A dispensation perspective is a powerful tool for discernment)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Can COVID-19 be just a “dry run” for much worse diseases to be developed by China?

Nah, Biden will be the deterrent.


11 posted on 06/18/2021 2:35:13 PM PDT by 353FMG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 353FMG

It may not have been planned that way, but you can take it to the bank that it is now.


12 posted on 06/18/2021 2:38:03 PM PDT by absalom01 (You should do your duty in all things. You cannot do more, and you should never wish to do less.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: MattMusson

Trump hate was not the main reason. Getting us all injected and on our way to electronic “vaccine-plus” electronic branding, etc., was.


13 posted on 06/18/2021 2:59:58 PM PDT by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

To call this “thing” a leak is to take the intent out of it’s development. It was, undoubtedly, designed as a germ warfare agent! So, why wouldn’t it be deployed for its intended purpose? It was fully developed, wasn’t it? So, why let it sit around the lab, moldering away? The people, who developed this, are guilty of crimes against humanity! Characterizing the dissemination of this killer as a leak doesn’t remove the culpability of those who did it. They should be accountable as in Nuremberg!


14 posted on 06/18/2021 4:02:25 PM PDT by old school
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson