Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

COVID-19

Mel Gibson tells Joe Rogan about alternative cancer treatments, dangers of Remdesivir

Published

5 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By Stephen Kokx

In the wide-ranging interview, Mel Gibson told Joe Rogan about his experience with Remdesivir, the pharmaceutical industry and alternative treatments for cancer.

Mel Gibson discussed a wide range of issues with podcaster Joe Rogan this week, almost all of them eliciting strong reactions on social media, especially his comments on cancer and the medical establishment.  

Gibson contracted COVID-19 in April 2020. During a week-long hospital stay, he was administered the dangerous drug Remdesivir, which, despite having been known to have a mortality rate of over 50 percent in trials, was approved by Dr. Anthony Fauci for use in hospitals during the pandemic. 

Gibson told Rogan that the experimental treatment nearly ended his life. 

“[Remdesivir] kills you. I found that afterward. And that’s why I wonder about Fauci,” Gibson said.  

 

Hospitals were incentivized to use Remdesivir, which has been shown to cause kidney failure, after the U.S. government approved a 20 percent reimbursement bonus for its use. Medical facilities also  obtained money from the government for classifying deaths as being due to COVID-19. Critics allege that those policies enticed medical professionals to use the risky treatment in order to kill patients as a way to unethically boost profits. 

Gibson told Rogan that he acquired COVID from his gardener, who he had known for twenty years, but that he did not survive his illness. 

“We both went to the same hospital, and he died, and I didn’t … I think we both got Remdesivir, which is not good,” he explained.  

“I don’t know why Fauci’s still walking around… or at least free,” he further remarked. 

Gibson and Rogan also talked about cancer and Big Pharma. Gibson revealed that he knows people who have been healed from the illness due to alternative treatments.  

“I have three friends. All three of them had stage 4 cancer. All three of whom don’t have cancer right now at all. And they had some serious stuff going on,” Gibson said. 

“And what did they take?” Rogan asked. 

“They took …what you’ve heard they’ve taken,” he replied. 

“Ivermectin, Fenbendazole,” Rogan said. “I’m hearing that a lot.” 

“They drank hydrochloride something or other … people drinking methylene blue,” Gibson said.  

“There’s a lot of stuff that does work, which is very strange,” Rogan remarked. “Because, again, it’s profit, when you hear about things that are demonized and they turn out to be effective, you always wonder: ‘what is going on here?’ How is [sic] our medical institutions, how have they failed us so that things that do cure you are not promoted because they’re not profitable? They can’t control it. They don’t have a patent on it. Whether it’s Vitamin D, K2, Magnesium, Zinc. I do all that stuff.” 

On Friday morning, an X-approved post titled “Mel Gibson’s Cancer Cure Claim Sparks Medical Debate” was published on the trending section. Some users piggybacked on Gibson’s remarks by stating that they too have used or know people who are using treatments similar to the ones Gibson’s friends did and that “cancer research” is a racket. 

 

 

 

Others were unconvinced and re-iterated the media narrative that ivermectin is a simply a “dewormer.”

 

Elsewhere in their conversation, Gibson defended the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin and the historical reality of the resurrection of Christ, a topic Rogan has seemingly taken a heightened interest in recently given that he discussed the matter in depth on his show with a Protestant guest less than two weeks ago.  

2025 Federal Election

Conservatives promise to ban firing of Canadian federal workers based on COVID jab status

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

The Conservative platform also vows that the party will oppose mandatory digital ID systems and a central bank digital currency if elected.

Pierre Poilievre’s Conservative Party’s 2025 election platform includes a promise to “ban” the firing of any federal worker based “solely” on whether or not they chose to get the COVID shots.

On page 23 of the “Canada First – For A Change” plan, which was released on Tuesday, the promise to protect un-jabbed federal workers is mentioned under “Protect Personal Autonomy, Privacy, and Data Security.”

It promises that a Conservative government will “Ban the dismissal of federal workers based solely on COVID vaccine status.”

The Conservative Party also promises to “Oppose any move toward mandatory digital ID systems” as well as “Prohibit the Bank of Canada from developing or implementing a central bank digital currency.”

In October 2021, the Liberal government of former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced unprecedented COVID-19 jab mandates for all federal workers and those in the transportation sector. The government also announced that the unjabbed would no longer be able to travel by air, boat, or train, both domestically and internationally.

This policy resulted in thousands losing their jobs or being placed on leave for non-compliance. It also trapped “unvaccinated” Canadians in the country.

COVID jab mandates, which also came from provincial governments with the support of the federal government, split Canadian society. The shots have been linked to a multitude of negative and often severe side effects, such as death, including in children.

Many recent rulings have gone in favor of those who chose not to get the shots and were fired as a result, such as an arbitrator ruling that one of the nation’s leading hospitals in Ontario must compensate 82 healthcare workers terminated after refusing to get the jabs.

Beyond health concerns, many Canadians, especially Catholics, opposed the injections on moral grounds because of their link to fetal cell lines derived from the tissue of aborted babies.

Continue Reading

COVID-19

RFK Jr. Launches Long-Awaited Offensive Against COVID-19 mRNA Shots

Published on

Nicolas Hulscher, MPH's avatar Nicolas Hulscher, MPH

As millions of Americans anxiously await action from the new HHS leadership against the COVID-19 mRNA injectionsinjected into over 9 million children this year—Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has finally gone publicly on the offensive:

Let’s go over each key point made by RFK Jr.:

The recommendation for children was always dubious. It was dubious because kids had almost no risk for COVID-19. Certain kids that had very profound morbidities may have a slight risk. Most kids don’t.

In the largest review to date on myocarditis following SARS-CoV-2 infection vs. COVID-19 vaccination, Mead et al found that vaccine-induced myocarditis is not only significantly more common but also more severe—particularly in children and young males. Our findings make clear that the risks of the shots overwhelmingly outweigh any theoretical benefit:

The OpenSAFELY study included more than 1 million adolescents and children and found that myocarditis was documented ONLY in COVID-19 vaccinated groups and NOT after COVID-19 infection. There were NO COVID-19-related deaths in any group. A&E attendance and unplanned hospitalization were higher after first vaccination compared to unvaccinated groups:

So why are we giving this to tens of millions of kids when the vaccine itself does have profound risk? We’ve seen huge associations of myocarditis and pericarditis with strokes, with other injuries, with neurological injuries.

The two largest COVID-19 vaccine safety studies ever conducted, involving 99 million (Faksova et al) and 85 million people (Raheleh et al), confirm RFK Jr.’s concerns, documenting significantly increased risks of serious adverse events following vaccination, including:

  1. Myocarditis (+510% after second dose)
  2. Acute Disseminated Encephalomyelitis (+278% after first dose)
  3. Cerebral Venous Sinus Thrombosis (+223% after first dose)
  4. Guillain-Barré Syndrome (+149% after first dose)
  5. Heart Attack (+286% after second dose)
  6. Stroke (+240% after first dose)
  7. Coronary Artery Disease (+244% after second dose)
  8. Cardiac Arrhythmia (+199% after first dose)

And this was clear even in the clinical data that came out of Pfizer. There were actually more deaths. There were about 23% more deaths in the vaccine group than the placebo group. We need to ask questions and we need to consult with parents.

Actually, according to the Pfizer’s clinical trial data, there were 43% more deaths in the vaccine group compared to the placebo group when post-unblinding deaths are included:

We need to give people informed consent, and we shouldn’t be making recommendations that are not good for the population.

Public acknowledgment of the grave harms of COVID-19 vaccines signals that real action is right around the corner. However, we must hope that action is taken for ALL age groups, as no one is spared from their life-reducing effects:

Alessandria et al (n=290,727, age > 10 years): People vaccinated with 2 doses lost 37% of life expectancy compared to the unvaccinated population during follow-up.

Nicolas Hulscher, MPH

Epidemiologist and Foundation Administrator, McCullough Foundation

www.mcculloughfnd.org

Please consider following both the McCullough Foundation and my personal account on X (formerly Twitter) for further content.

For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.
Continue Reading

Trending

X