Connect with us

COVID-19

You won’t believe the irony of this doctor’s punishment for using ivermectin to treat COVID

Published

10 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By Dr. Byram W. Bridle

This punishment forced the physician to ‘re-learn’ that what they did with ivermectin is exactly what they should have done!

When I heard the following story I was flabbergasted and knew that I must share it. It is one of those truthful tales that leaves you shaking your head in near disbelief…

I recently chatted with a physician who had their license restricted because they used ivermectin to prevent severe disease and save the lives of their patients with COVID-19. They did this because they kept abreast of the latest evidence with respect to ivermectin and COVID-19. As we all know, this challenged the prevailing but now ever-so-obviously misleading “COVID-19 narrative” that pervaded the past few years. This doctor is a gem. We need our hospitals and medical practices filled with these kinds of doctors; not the parrots that could only regurgitate “safe and effective” whenever their lips parted.

The licensing body for this physician made them undergo re-training so they could become educated about what the primary scientific literature says about COVID-19. Remember, a key reason this doctor was forced into “re-training” is because they dared to follow the real science and promote ivermectin as a truly safe and truly effective early intervention strategy to protect people from getting severe COVID-19. They had successfully implemented this strategy with many patients, thereby saving many lives. Then, their ability to do this was stripped from them because the cheap, off-patent, previously readily available drug that was deemed one of the safest and most important by the World Health Organization, was vilified. The ability to re-purpose safe drugs like ivermectin was revoked.

With this background in mind, check out what happened during this great doctor’s “re-education program”…

They were required to do some of their re-education using a website at McMaster University, which is in the city of Hamilton in the province of Ontario in the country of Canada. This university lays claim to being the birth-place of what is called “evidence-based medicine” (it seems obvious to me that the practice of modern medicine should always be based on evidence, but my purpose here is not to delve into the nomenclature). Here is what they say at this link:

McMaster and the Faculty of Health Sciences is considered the birthplace of evidence-based medicine, which is described as one of the most important medical advances in the past 150 years, according to the British Medical Journal. EBM integrates the best research data with clinical expertise and patient values, with the goal to use the best evidence to give patients the best possible care. [Emphasis added.]

This sounds great, doesn’t it?

They offer resources on this webpage to allow physicians to find the evidence they need to “give patients the best possible care”:

Under the heading “Find Evidence,” McMaster University states the following:

We search the published literature and compile public health relevant reviews – eliminating your need to search and screen individual databases.

Did you catch that? A physician would not need to search elsewhere because McMaster University has already done this for them; they have identified the best available evidence. Remember this!

If you click on the link on the page that says “Search healthevidence.org,” it takes you to a page where, as implied, one can search for health evidence with the intent to provide the highest quality, vetted data to be used “to give patients the best possible care.”

The good doctor told me that one of their searches was for “ivermectin, covid-19.” Considering that they were undergoing “re-education” for having the gall to use ivermectin in their personal quest to “give [their own] patients the best possible care,” they were shocked by what they found. And I was so shocked by what I heard that I immediately did the search myself to confirm it. So, last night (November 28, 2023), I typed “ivermectin, covid-19” into the search engine:

And this was the result:

Note that only one article came up. But, it certainly does look like a good one. After all, it is a systematic review, meta-analysis, and trial sequential analysis. It was vetted by McMaster University, the birthplace of “evidence-based medicine,” and highlighted as the key document to, as the title of the article implies, “inform clinical guidelines.” “Health Evidence” (i.e., McMaster University) gave it a high rating.

When you select the article, this is what you see:

Here is the full citation:

Bryant A, Lawrie TA, Dowswell T, Fordham EJ, Mitchell S, Hill SR, et al. (2021). Ivermectin for prevention and treatment of COVID-19 infection: A systematic review, meta-analysis, and trial sequential analysis to inform clinical guidelinesAmerican Journal of Therapeutics, 28(4), e434-e460.

I clicked on “View Quality Assessment” and this is what it looks like:

Here is a close-up:

It gets highly rated; an 8 out of 10 to be exact. Note that it gets a checkmark for “the certainty of the review’s conclusions.” After all, a physician would want to be certain that the evidence they are using to inform their clinical practice is solid.

So, brace yourself for this. The article draws the following conclusions:

[E]vidence finds that large reductions in COVID-19 deaths are possible using ivermectin. Using ivermectin early in the clinical course may reduce numbers progressing to severe disease. The apparent safety and low cost suggest that ivermectin is likely to have a significant impact on the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic globally.

Houston, we have a problem…. - Block Street Journal - Medium

Highly-trained physicians should not be forced to endure this kind of circular hypocrisy!

I conducted my own extensive review of the literature with respect to ivermectin and COVID-19. Especially when one removes the several studies that had fatal design flaws, I came to the same conclusion as both the good doctor and McMaster University. Sadly, this conclusion that “large reductions in COVID-19 deaths are possible using ivermectin” was never promoted by the power-brokers of public health. So, in the present day, this conclusion needs to be modified to say:

Large reductions in COVID-19 deaths WERE possible using ivermectin.

I mourn for the many people that would have been alive today had physicians been allowed to “follow the [REAL] science.”

As a scientist of integrity I am appalled by how our medical professionals of integrity have been and are still being treated. It is abhorrent. I will stand shoulder-to-shoulder with these brothers and sisters and continue to call out the hypocrisies of their health care licensing bodies. If the public cares about their health, they will too. After all, we should all want to be cared for by critically thinking, deeply caring health professionals, not the parrots that have proven to be highly susceptible to propagandizing.

Perhaps it is time for the people running the colleges that oversee health professionals to undergo re-education.

Who wants to take a guess as to how long it will take for McMaster University to alter the results of this particular literature search to match “the narrative” as opposed to the truth?

Reprinted with permission from COVID Chronicles.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

COVID-19

10 Shocking Stories the Media Buried This Week

Published on

The Vigilant FoxThe Vigilant Fox

Measles, Fauci, Politics and Public Education. This is a fascinating read 

#10 – ‘Measles Death’ of 6-Year-Old Girl Exposed as a Media HOAX

The media claimed a 6-year-old girl died of measles, but “she did not die of measles by any stretch of the imagination,” Dr. Pierre Kory says.

“In fact, she died of pneumonia. But it gets worse than that because she didn’t really die of pneumonia. She died of a MEDICAL ERROR.”

Let that sink in.

What happened was a complete breakdown in basic medical care. The hospital failed to give her the appropriate antibiotic regimen to treat her pneumonia. By the time they corrected their mistake, it was too late, and the girl died “catastrophically.”

“I mean, this is like medicine 101. You put them on two antibiotics to cover all the possibilities. It’s a grievous error, and it’s an error which led to her death,” Dr. Kory attested.

Not only did Covenant Children’s Hospital fail to provide the appropriate antibiotic, but when they noticed their error, they dragged their feet and took another 10 hours to administer it.

“By that time, she was already on a ventilator. And approximately 24 hours later—actually, less than 24 hours later—she died,” Dr. Kory explained.

And she did not pass away peacefully. According to Dr. Kory, “She died rather catastrophically.”

And while her family grieved, the media hijacked her death to stir fear and push the vaccine narrative. Just another “measles death” used as a political weapon.

This is a case Dr. Pierre Kory calls “absolutely enraging.”

And it is. Just another example of how the media will shamelessly twist the story of a grieving family’s loss to push Big Pharma’s agenda. That’s not just dishonest. That’s evil, plain and simple.

Follow @ChildrensHD for the full interview and more details on this enraging story.

(See 9 More Revealing Stories Below)

#9 – Bill Maher guest calls out Fauci’s ridiculous pardon, saying, “There’s a reason he was given a pardon back to 2014.”

“There is something very wrong going on here.”

“Everyone knew it [gain-of-function research] was dangerous a long time ago. You go back to 2015, you will find a big meeting in London where they say there’s one lab in the world most likely to have a problem with this—Wuhan. Do you know who was the biggest supporter of gain of function research for the last 30 years? Anthony Fauci.”

It turns out that in 2014, 300 scientists warned Anthony Fauci would start a global pandemic.

RFK Jr. previously explained that following the high-profile escape of three bugs from U.S. labs, these 300 scientists sent a letter to President Obama, urging him to shut down Anthony Fauci’s gain-of-function research.

Obama issued a moratorium and shut down 18 of the worst projects by Anthony Fauci. In the end, he really didn’t shut them down. Instead, Obama moved the research offshore to places like Ukraine, the former Soviet State of Georgia, and the Wuhan Institute of Virology in Wuhan, China.

Now, it is widely accepted that COVID-19 originated from that very lab in Wuhan, China. The 300 scientists were right when they said Anthony Fauci would start a global pandemic.

#8 – Kevin O’Leary delivers a harsh reality check to people burning Teslas: You’re going to “rot in hell in prison.”

“And frankly, as far as I’m concerned, that’s okay,” he said.

O’Leary left no room for debate, making it clear that there’s zero justification for the destruction:

“When you set a car on fire, you should go to jail. You’re a criminal. And I don’t think we have to talk about it in any other context.”

He also had a blunt message for those thinking they’ll get away with it:

“And all those cars have cameras in them, and those dealerships have cameras. You’re beyond being stupid when you do that… You’re going to spend five to 20 years in prison. If they get them on terrorism—which I think is a stretch—there will be no parole, no shortened sentence. They’ll rot in hell in prison for 20 years. And frankly, as far as I’m concerned, that’s okay.”

#7- Stephen A. Smith Rips his OWN STAFF while recording his show.

Smith grilled his staff’s loyalty to the Democratic Party after pitching this common-sense idea to Democrats: “Rather than telling us what we should vote against, maybe you should present us with options of what to vote for.

“I mean, my God. Are you okay, Michael, with me suggesting that? Are you okay with me, Sherry, suggesting that?” Smith asked.

“Rashawn Galen and all of a bunch of leftists that’s under my umbrella trying to act like they’re independents when they’re full of it! I’m talking about my own damn staff,” he clarified.

“I’m a centrist. I think my man, Rashawn, is a centrist. The rest of these damn people working for me. I mean, what left-wing party are you associated with? I mean, you gotta believe this stuff.”

#6 – Vivek Ramaswamy drops a game-changing idea for public education: merit-based pay for public school teachers.

“Pay for performance. That’s what businesses do. There’s no reason we shouldn’t be running our public schools in the same way.”

Vivek announced that he plans for Ohio to become the first state in the nation to adopt merit-based pay for every teacher, principal, and administrator.

He says that performance reviews should go beyond standardized testing, incorporating peer reviews, parent feedback, and student outcomes—with a clear goal of rewarding the best educators.

“The best teachers in the country right now, sadly, are underpaid. We need to fix that—but fix it through meritocracy,” Vivek said. “Thanks to President Trump’s bold actions today, we can lead the way.”

While you’re here, don’t forget to follow me (@VigilantFox) for more weekly news roundups.

#5 – Tim Walz absurdly claims that Trump’s plan to dismantle the Department of Education could take America back to an era of racial segregation.

“And then it’s about the Civil Rights Department at the Department of Education that makes sure that we don’t have a situation where a Ruby Bridges is escorted to school with police. And so we’re back in an area where we can segregate,” Walz said.

Somehow, giving control back to the states means we’re suddenly back in 1960. This is why no one takes Democrats seriously anymore. All they do is cry wolf.

#4 – Bill Maher believes JFK wasn’t killed by a lone gunman—says a lot of people wanted Kennedy dead.

QUESTION: “Is it time to move on from this conspiracy theory?”

MAHER: “Well, I mean, do you think it’s a conspiracy theory? Plainly, there was not a single gunman, right?… But the magic bullet. There could not have been a bullet that went through a guy, went around him, came back, went through the other guy, got lunch at the diner, came back, shot him in the back of the head. I mean, it’s just. Come on, everybody heard a shot from the grassy knoll.”

“The idea that the CIA is going to now suddenly go, ‘You’re right, we had something to do with it.’ I’m not saying they did, but a lot of people wanted him [JFK] dead.”

#3 – Elon Musk sounds the alarm on “magic money computers” at the federal government that can “send money out of nothing.”

“So you may think that the government computers all talk to each other. They synchronize, they add up what funds are going somewhere, and it’s coherent that the numbers, for example, that you’re presented as a senator, are actually the real numbers. They’re not,” Musk explained.

“They’re not totally wrong,” he continued. “They’re probably off by 5% or 10% in some cases. So I call it Magic Money Computer. Any computer which can just make money out of thin air. That’s Magic Money.”

“So how does that work?” Ted Cruz asked.

It just issues payments,” Musk answered. “I think we found now 14 magic money computers. They just send money out of nothing.”

This raises a critical question: If the government’s books are off by 5% to 10% in some cases, leaving up to hundreds of billions of dollars unaccounted for, where is all that money actually going?

#2 – The New York Times finally ADMITS the “conspiracy theorists” were right about COVID and that Fauci and the “experts” misled the public.

“Perhaps we were misled on purpose.”

I can’t believe they actually printed this. Here’s what they’re finally admitting:

• Tony Fauci, Francis Collins, and Jeremy Farrar coordinated a media strategy to discredit lab leak discussions. Emails show they worked behind the scenes to smear and silence anyone who questioned the official narrative.

• The Biden administration and intelligence agencies pressured social media platforms like Twitter and Facebook to censor lab leak discussions and label them as “misinformation.”

• Kristian Andersen, Robert Garry, and other scientists knew the truth but covered it up. Behind closed doors, they admitted a lab escape was likely. In public, they dismissed it as a “conspiracy theory.”

• WHO’s Jeremy Farrar got a burner phone to secretly coordinate meetings with Fauci, Collins, and top scientists, ensuring their discussions stayed off the record.

• Kristian Andersen, Robert Garry, and Eddie Holmes strategized how to mislead New York Times reporter Donald McNeil Jr., making sure he didn’t dig too deep into the lab leak theory.

• The infamous Proximal Origin paper, authored by Andersen, Garry, Holmes, Andrew Rambaut, and W. Ian Lipkin, was a coordinated effort to mislead the public. Private Slack messages revealed they believed a lab escape was not only possible but likely—yet they publicly denied it.

• Peter Daszak and EcoHealth Alliance helped cover for the Wuhan Institute of Virology, despite knowing their risky gain-of-function research could have caused the outbreak.

• The Wuhan lab, run by Shi Zhengli (“Bat Woman”), had horrifyingly lax safety protocols—yet they expected the public to believe a leak was impossible.

And now, after years of smearing and slandering the “conspiracy theorists,” The New York Times is quietly admitting the so-called “conspiracy theorists” were right all along.

#1 – RFK Jr. Sounds the Alarm on Bird Flu Vaccines

The USDA plans to inject millions of chickens to stop the bird flu outbreak, but RFK Jr. says “leaky vaccines” could make things worse.

He breaks it down here. This is the must-read thread of the week:

Originals

RFK Jr. Issues Grave Vaccination Warning

·
Mar 21
RFK Jr. Issues Grave Vaccination Warning
 

The USDA wants to vaccinate millions of chickens to stop the bird flu. They claim it’s the ultimate solution, but not everyone’s convinced. RFK Jr., for one, is sounding the alarm.

 

Read full story

Share

While you’re here, don’t forget to follow me (@VigilantFox) for more weekly news roundups.

 

Continue Reading

COVID-19

Mark Carney was an early supporter of government crackdown against Freedom Convoy

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Jonathon Van Maren

It is difficult not to conclude that he was publicly building the case for what Trudeau would ultimately do: freeze bank accounts, invoke the Emergencies Act, and launch a crackdown. Ironically, a federal justice would conclude, based on a mountain of evidence, that the government crackdown Carney appeared to be advocating did precisely what he accused the convoy protesters of doing: violating the fundamental rights of Canadians.

The Freedom Convoy arrived in Ottawa on January 29, 2022. Two weeks later, on February 14, Justin Trudeau declared the Emergencies Act (which replaced the War Measures Act in 1988); his Public Safety Minister, Marco Mendicino, insisted that law enforcement had requested the measure. Police from all over the country began arriving in Ottawa, and on February 18, they were sent to clear the streets — including a contingent on horseback. I was in Ottawa for the crackdown, and some of the scenes were surreal.

On January 23, 2024, Federal Court Justice Richard Mosley ruled that Trudeau’s decision to invoke the Emergencies Act was both “unreasonable” and a violation of the rights of Canadians as guaranteed by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. He found that the invocation of the act lacked “justification, transparency, and intelligibility,” infringed on freedom of expression, and violated protection against “unreasonable search and seizure” due to the freezing of bank accounts and suppression of protests.

The Trudeau government is appealing this decision, insisting — against all evidence — that the Emergencies Act was essential to restoring peace despite the fact that there was not a single incident of documented violence during the Freedom Convoy. Further to that, Royal Canadian Mounted Police commissioner Brenda Lucki directly contradicted the claims made by Mendicino, stating that law enforcement had not requested the Emergencies Act, a key aspect of the government’s justification for invocation. “There was never a question of requesting the Emergencies Act,” Lucki told the Public Order Emergency Commission bluntly.

Interestingly, one of the early advocates of a crackdown on the Freedom Convoy was … now-Prime Minister Mark Carney. On February 7, a mere week into the protests, Carney penned a furious editorial in the Globe and Mail titled “This is sedition—and it’s time to put an end to it in Ottawa.” He claimed that people were being “terrorized”; that women were “fleeing abuse”; he stated, bluntly, “This is sedition. That’s a word I never thought I’d use in Canada. It means ‘incitement of resistance to or insurrection against lawful authority.’”

Carney went further, writing that although the protest might have been initially peaceful, “by now anyone sending money to the convoy should be in no doubt: You are funding sedition,” and called on the government to “identify those who are prolonging this manufactured crisis and punish them to the full extent of the law.” He opined that donating to the Freedom Convoy amounted to supporting an insurrection, concluding:

It’s time to end the sedition in Ottawa by enforcing the law and following the money … Decisive action must be taken to protect Canadians and our democracy. Our Constitution is based on peace, order and good government. We must live up to this founding principle in order to protect all our freedoms.”

Carney was already a key figure in Trudeau’s circle at this point, and it is difficult not to conclude that he was publicly building the case for what Trudeau would ultimately do: freeze bank accounts, invoke the Emergencies Act, and launch a crackdown. Ironically, a federal justice would conclude, based on a mountain of evidence, that the government crackdown Carney appeared to be advocating did precisely what he accused the convoy protesters of doing: violating the fundamental rights of Canadians.

Carney has kept understandably mum on all this since his leadership race and subsequent victory, although presumably he will be continuing the Trudeau government’s ongoing appeal to overturn the federal ruling that they violated the rights of Canadians. Indeed, for his Chief of Staff, Carney chose … Marco Mendicino, the very cabinet minister who appears to have blatantly lied about law enforcement requesting the Emergencies Act. Ironically, Carney also selected Chrystia Freeland, the minister directly responsible for freezing (at minimum) the bank accounts of hundreds of Canadians, as Minister of Transport.

To state that the Trudeau government violated the fundamental rights of Canadians in cracking down on protesters often rendered desperate by their vaccine mandate policies — which they cynically used as a wedge issue in a (failed) attempted to secure a second majority government — is not a right-wing conspiracy theory. It is the considered opinion of a federal judge that, to date, has not been overturned. Carney appears to be cut from precisely the same cloth — and has surrounded himself with those who carried out the crackdown.

Featured Image

Jonathon’s writings have been translated into more than six languages and in addition to LifeSiteNews, has been published in the National PostNational ReviewFirst Things, The Federalist, The American Conservative, The Stream, the Jewish Independent, the Hamilton SpectatorReformed Perspective Magazine, and LifeNews, among others. He is a contributing editor to The European Conservative.

His insights have been featured on CTV, Global News, and the CBC, as well as over twenty radio stations. He regularly speaks on a variety of social issues at universities, high schools, churches, and other functions in Canada, the United States, and Europe.

He is the author of The Culture WarSeeing is Believing: Why Our Culture Must Face the Victims of AbortionPatriots: The Untold Story of Ireland’s Pro-Life MovementPrairie Lion: The Life and Times of Ted Byfield, and co-author of A Guide to Discussing Assisted Suicide with Blaise Alleyne.

Jonathon serves as the communications director for the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform.

Continue Reading

Trending

X