Ivermectin Deception?

Many of you have written to me about you or your family’s experience with taking ivermectin. My prayers and best wishes are for everyone’s good health and well-being. I am not a medical doctor, and I am not giving any medical advice or medical opinion about ivermectin. However, you know that I always like to dig deeper and I don’t take things at face value. So when I realized how many people were running out to get ivermectin, how it was intentionally being restricted, and how much media attention ivermectin was getting, I knew I had to dig deeper into this story.

I’m not here to instruct anyone on what to do or what not to do. This post is an opportunity to learn about information you may be unaware of in order to make the best decision for you, and I hope this piece will encourage you to continue your research.

With all the buzz around Ivermectin… One can’t help but be skeptical. According to my research, ivermectin has been widely distributed for over 20 years by Granny Gates, Merck, Pfizer, and other big players so it's understandable that this sudden controversy has sparked some interest and debate. Part of me believes that they restrict access to raise demand. All the negative attention from the mainstream media and covid cultists really drove individuals on the opposite side of the aisle to seek out Ivermectin especially as it is lauded as a treatment by public figures like Joe Rogan and other prominent personalities and promoted by organizations such as America’s Frontline Doctors (AFLDS) and Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC).

Given that the evildoers know that many people will not receive any type of vaccine or "vaccines," and given that “global” organizations operating in the best interests of the Pharma cartel want to increase vaccination rates, is it reasonable to assume that they will devise alternative methods for the dissidents to consume their poison? It's a fairly simple task if both sides are controlled. Controlled op celebs advocate a "treatment," and the media joins in to create a phony campaign condemning and cracking down on the distribution of this specific "treatment," prompting people to seek it out and raising demand.

As this whole ordeal was politicized, the people identified on the “left” were calling Ivermectin horse paste and pushing the vaccine as “safe and effective.” And you had the people identified on the “right” that were touting these two main points:

1. The suppression of “alternative treatments” was by design in order to administer the vaccine under EUA. Okay, but what about the push for monoclonal antibodies? Gilead’s Regeneron? Remdesivir? With little effort in your research, you can see the government pushing the monoclonal antibody treatments if you check out the HHS.gov website and search the prior articles about monoclonal antibody treatments and you’ll find information since the onset in 2020. (This is a separate rabbit hole we can tackle another day.)

2. Ivermectin has been widely distributed for decades and proven “safe & effective” … gee, where have I heard that phrase before? Anyway, I’m not here to argue about the validity of point number 2. This could be true, however, either you think Shill Gates and his pharmaceutical allies are altruistic OR the worst of the worst.

Let’s start with the facts

• The men that discovered ivermectin (or credited with discovering it) worked for Merck. 

• Satoshi Omura and William C. Campbell are the men who discovered Avermectins and ivermectin and jointly won a Nobel peace prize for their discovery.

• Merck’s patent on ivermectin expired in 1996, though it was extended for different periods in various countries. Thus, other companies' ivermectin drugs are now commercially available.

• Bill Gates, the WHO, Merck, Pfizer, Sanofi, Johnson & Johnson and others have partnered to donate billions of doses of ivermectin worldwide for over 20 years. Bill Gates called ivermectin a “massive success”

So, in addition to giving away millions of doses of ivermectin, they mass treat everyone with it—not just the sick.

• An entire organization was formed just for the donation and distribution of ivermectin

• The Mectizan program partnered with the Task Force for Global Health. The task force helps distribute these billions of FREE doses of Ivermectin worldwide.

• “The Task Force was initially founded to solve one global health challenge - low, global, childhood immunization rates.”

Who founded the Task Force for Global Health?

• This Task Force was established with the primary objective of increasing vaccination rates, and its founders, William C. Watson and William H. Foege, both worked for the CDC.

  

Are you beginning to wonder why certain drugs are dispensed like candy? Oh, and of course another connection to Shill Gates. ↓

So is it not logical to ask ourselves why doctors from both sides of the aisle are pushing the “treatments” and pharma drugs that are funded and distributed by Shill Gates and other large global organizations?

Should we not consider why the same criminal vaccine companies and people like Shill Gates — who, by the way, create and distribute oral vaccine pills — want to manufacture, fund, and distribute millions of FREE oral ivermectin pills? The very same ivermectin that thousands of “anti-vax” people begged for and willingly took. I’m sure there is zero hidden agenda at all…

This isn't just a spiritual battle; it's also a mental one. It's a form of psychological warfare. Was this reaction planned and anticipated? Evildoers enjoy causing chaos, and out of chaos comes order and control. Evil has a grip on all sides and to believe otherwise would be naïve. Chaos agents exist, and while some are easier to identify, others are more adept at deceit.

Do they purposely use celebrities to sway public opinion in one direction while using CO celebs to sway public opinion in the opposite direction? One side promotes the needle and the other promotes a pill? What if both “treatments” are poison? In that hypothetical situation, both sides are controlled and the Pharma cartel always stands to gain since both sides are promoting the use of pharmaceuticals, right? Hmm… continued reliance on the system and they can get their cocktail into the majority of the population? Say less. It would be a logical tactic if their objective is to raise vaccination rates.

Are we to believe that if there was a magical cure, it would receive so much media attention? By restricting access to it and creating such a media frenzy, they practically enticed people to seek out ivermectin as if it were forbidden fruit. Oh, and I'm sure there are no mysterious deaths linked to Pharma whistleblowers or individuals who have revealed true cures.

Brief side note: For pet owners out there, especially those who have collies or aussies, you may want to be aware that some animals and particular breeds are highly sensitive to the toxic effects of Ivermectin.

When looking at other Pharma companies with ties to Ivermectin, I came across Zimecterin Gold horse dewormer made by Boehringer Ingelheim.

↓ Nothing to see here…

Guess who else they work with → https://www.boehringer-ingelheim.us/covid-19/covid-19/our-work-bill-and-melinda-gates-foundation

What about the people that claim Ivermectin worked for them?

Many individuals claim that it "worked" for them, but was it really anything more than a temporary fix? Could it lead to longer-lasting, more degenerative injury that the person is unaware of?

It is obvious that western medicine has saved the lives of many people. There is a place and a time for it, but how many people who took ivermectin were in a life-threatening condition as opposed to merely being unwell? And why are they pushing it on everyone even if they aren’t sick? Let’s take a look at some concerning statements from Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC) co-founder, Dr. Pierre Kory.

(FLCCC burst onto the scene as soon as possible — a little too quickly — in their white coats just like AFLDS. Something about it reminds me of the Milgram experiment. Not the experiment per se, but the enduring association of competence with white lab coats is reinforced. I don’t know… maybe it’s just me?)

I'd like to highlight a few quotes from Dr. Kory that got my attention.

Dr. Pierre Kory from FLCCC Testifies to The Senate Committee About Ivermectin

“Patients — or people even — citizens, healthy citizens on Ivermectin do not get covid.”

Why would you need it if you aren’t sick? How do you know they didn’t get the cooties just because they took Ivermectin? What about people that don’t take Ivermectin and don’t get the cooties? What about people that do take Ivermectin and get sick?

“In the prophylaxis studies, which there were four, they took covid-19 patients who tested positive for covid-19. They identified their household numbers. They gave them Ivermectin. So they had a whole group of household contacts of covid-19 patients who took Ivermectin. The other households they did not give Ivermectin. Every single randomized control trial shows that in the households that were on Ivermectin drastically reduced rates of transmission. They did not — The households did not get sick. You can protect people from this disease with Ivermectin.”

and then a couple more quotes from Dr. Kory when he was asked about Big Tech censorship:

Q:

“Dr. Kory, could I just ask you a question or two about social media? You wrote in your testimony that one of the barriers to using already existing therapeutics — whatever they may be, there is an array of them — uh, has been social media and you say that your pages in particular have been repeatedly blocked on Facebook. I wondered if you could elaborate on your experience with Facebook or any other social media on this topic?”

Dr. Pierre Kory:

“Yeah, you know I want to try to be respectful because I think the intention is correct, but the execution is unfortunately damaging which is my guess at what the social media outlets — particularly Facebook — um, is that they want to cut down on misinformation, right. Which is many doctors are out there claiming that XYZ work in this disease. The challenge is you are also silencing those of us who are expert, reasoned, researched, and extremely knowledgeable. So my group, our Facebook page, and again, I repeat, we are some of the most highly published physicians in our specialty. We have spent decades in academic medicine so we are not just some random doctor, but our group, every time we mention Ivermectin we have been put in Facebook jail. Currently, as of this moment, our Facebook page is shut down to where we cannot post anything. We have asked the senator for help in that because we are trying to disseminate expert opinion uh heavily researched insights into the therapeutics of this disease and we are unable to do that on social media.”

Q:

“What reason have they given — if any — for putting you in Facebook jail?”

Dr. Pierre Kory:

“I don’t know that we have gotten specific reasons, but the best that we can tell is that we were mentioning Ivermectin. So any claims to a simple solution, and by the way, I am going to stand by my professional reputation, my decades in medicine and I’m going to tell you that I believe — not only I believe, but my group of doctors and there are at least nine of us who coauthored this manuscript — we are telling the world this is the solution to covid-19 and it can be implemented rapidly. However, social media does not want to hear that from doctors and I don’t blame them because otherwise you’re going to have doctors coming along and saying… I don’t know… soda water is the next solution so I understand the intent, however, um I just wish some credibility would be applied to us and I don’t know how to solve that answer because I do think misinformation IS a problem, it is a deep and significant problem in this pandemic.”

It appears that Dr. Kory IS sympathetic to Big Tech’s crackdown on speech and information. He emphasizes that “misinformation” is a “deep and significant” problem.

Q:

“Is Facebook staffed with expert epidemiologists and infectious disease researchers to your knowledge?

Dr. Pierre Kory:

“Not to my knowledge, certainly not.”

Q:

“Should Facebook be the arbiter of what counts as medical research in your opinion?”

Dr. Pierre Kory:

“Of course I don’t think that they should be the arbiters, but I’m trying to be fair and I-I I do think their intent is to protect people from misinformation, however, they are also blocking good information. It is a very hard filter to put on and I can understand their challenge and I just wish they did better at it.”

Well, there you have it. I don’t know how those statements wouldn’t be concerning, but I’m all ears if you have another interpretation.

In conclusion, I look at it as a psychological game:

controlled op gains peoples trust → pushes Pharma drug → use of media to create a fake frenzy about it → cut supply or restrict access → drives up demand. I’m not here to dispute the efficacy of Ivermectin for certain conditions, nor am I here to tell you what to do (or what not to do), but I don’t think it hurts to dig deeper and be a healthy skeptic. I don’t claim to know it all, but you either trust these criminal entities or you don’t and proceed with caution.