All Episodes
March 11, 2024 - Stay Free - Russel Brand
39:18
Dr Pierre Kory - On New Excess Death Data

Join us for today's special guest, Dr Pierre Kory an American critical care physician, president and co-founder of the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance, who gained attention during the pandemic for his suggesting of alternative treatments for COVID-19.Find Dr. Kory’s bestselling book, The War on Ivermectin here: https://thehighwire.shop/collections/books/products/the-war-on-ivermectin-the-medicine-that-saved-millions-and-could-have-ended-the-pandemic  Find more of Dr Pierre Kory visit https://drpierrekory.com   --💙Support our channel and become an awakened wonder through Locals:https://bit.ly/RussellBrand-SupportWATCH me LIVE weekdays on Rumble:https://bit.ly/russellbrand-rumbleVisit the new merch store:https://bit.ly/Stay-Free-StoreFollow on social media:
X: @rustyrockets
INSTAGRAM: @russellbrand
FACEBOOK: @russellbrand

| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hello there you Awakening Wonders on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you download your podcasts.
We really appreciate you, our listeners, and want to bring you more content.
We will be delivering a podcast every day, seven days a week, every single day.
You'll get a detailed breakdown of current topics that the mainstream media should be covering, but if they are covering, they're amplifying establishment messages and not telling you the truth.
Once a week, we bring you in-depth conversations with guests like Jordan Peterson, RFK Jr., Sam Harris, Vandana Shiva, Gabor Mate, and many more.
Now enjoy this episode of Stay Free with Russell Brand.
Remember, there's an episode every single day to educate and elevate our consciousness together.
Stay free and enjoy the episode.
Thanks, Russell.
It's an honour.
I first want to talk about excess deaths and the peculiar quirk that it is insurance companies that have contributed to the revelation of the extent of excess deaths because they needed to adjust their premiums to account for unexpected and unusual deaths.
Why is this, first of all, significant, Pierre?
Well, I think, you know, the actuarial industry, that's data that really, there's no incentive to corrupt.
I mean, that's how they make their money, right?
So that's as accurate a data as it's possible.
They have to know what the death rates are, right, in order to price their products.
And they started talking about how they saw unprecedented rates of dying.
In fact, they said historically unprecedented.
They've never seen rates of death like this amongst young people.
Largely starting in 2021, and in particular that third quarter.
And if I don't know if you were aware of what was going on in the US in the third quarter of 21, but that's when all of the mandates proliferated.
So university, health care, colleges, corporations.
And the most telling data comes out of the group life health insurance industry, because in the United States, those who have group life health insurance policies is essentially Fortune 500 companies.
Those are corporate employees.
They're historically the healthiest members of society.
Far and away the healthiest members, dying at the lowest rates, and suddenly they started dying at rates higher than the general U.S.
population, particularly young people.
That's extraordinary.
It's also peculiar to me that a revelation would come out of an institution or industry such as the one you have described because one imagines that what we would loosely call establishment interests or the preservation of the interests of the system would prevail against those kind of revelations.
But as you have explained previously in your many op-eds on this subject, often with incredible caution, That they haven't advertised or even sought to demonstrate what the cause of these excess deaths might be, simply that there are unprecedented excess deaths.
Now what's striking to people that operate in our space, that's independent media space, that's anti-establishment space, is that these kind of ideas, that we would see unprecedented and unusual excess deaths as a result of these medications, that was regarded as an outlandish, peripheral, and is still not yet It's not empirically demonstrable.
It's not demonstrably true that what's behind this is vaccine injury or vaccine related deaths or heart disease or a variety of other conditions.
But isn't it extraordinary to see information moving from the periphery, from what you would loosely call conspiracy theory, becoming verified either in the field of medicine or in this case the field of finance.
And if If something as significant and as obvious as the adjustment of insurance premiums to account for, oh we can't insure you because you might die in your 30s or 40s in a way that's completely unanticipated or at least couldn't be anticipated 10 years ago, why would the FDA or a comparable organisation not be conducting a serious investigation into the phenomena of excess deaths?
I think that would open the door to admitting immense responsibility and liability for what we're talking about, Russell, which is that this is a humanitarian catastrophe.
I mean, in my most recent op-ed, we have data show that in the first nine months of 2023,
158,000 Americans died more than predicted, more than would be expected by stable rates
of death.
That's more than all the combat losses, including Vietnam and beyond, ever since.
And so this is a massive amount of Americans dying.
Our life expectancy dropped from 79 to 76 in the span of three years.
Who has to die for that to happen?
It's nothing but young people.
The rates, the most alarming rates are the 35 to 44 and 44 to 55.
There were incredible sudden spikes in death, really centered in the third quarter and fourth
quarter of 2021.
You have to ask yourself what major societal event occurred at that time that could possibly
explain those deaths.
It was not all COVID deaths.
We have the data.
You can't explain it with COVID.
I've not seen anyone with a credible alternative explanation for a sudden spike in the healthiest
members of the society.
And the other interesting thing about the data is, when you look at who is dying, it's essentially the white-collar workers died more than gray-collar that died more than blue-collar.
So you have to ask yourself, what happened in the workplace, in the American workplace, in the third quarter of 21?
And that's the only answer I can come up with.
Well, that's extraordinary.
So it prevails more among the class of people that will have been mandated or at least compelled to take those medications, at least that is a conclusion that could be drawn.
One of the things that's fascinated me, Pierre, has been the number of times that an evident pre-bunking took place. The idea that it was
conspiratorial to query the indemnity that the vaccine manufacturers were granted, that many people
that operate again in these kind of spaces pointed out was peculiar and cause for concern. The Pfizer
and Moderna being granted indemnity.
Now of course in the UK we're seeing now some legal actions against country, companies, excuse
me, I sometimes get country and company mixed up. I can see why that error Freudian though it may be
occurs like the AstraZeneca.
You know I've been found potential or at least being pursued legally because of blood clots and heart conditions There's been acknowledgement of myocarditis of course, but when you piece together even from a position of punditry rather than expertise which is of course the position that you're assessing this from is It seems that when you look at the indemnity that was granted, the significance of the propaganda, the astonishing trope that people take vaccinations in order to protect the vulnerable and elderly prior to the revelation that there were no clinical trials against transmission.
So that was an entirely bogus argument from the beginning.
One of the things that some people, sociologists, pundits, epidemiologists said is that we could potentially In order to, at least the argument was, preserve and protect older people, be exposing young people to incredible risk.
And this data suggests that that's exactly what's happened.
Absolutely.
I mean, we know...
Even without the data on transmission, we already knew the severity of the illness, how young people fared, how really no young people were dying from COVID, yet we had experimental therapy rolled out in which exploded the VAERS database from day one.
I mean, I was first made aware of problems with, not problems with VAERS, but signals from VAERS.
The third week of January 2020, we already had several hundred deaths reported, which far exceeded the stopping point of any novel product.
And what has been happening since then?
Nothing but dismissal, distortion, and ignoring of all that data.
And it continues, as we're talking about today with this life insurance data.
Who's talking about it?
Who's investigating this?
That's what these op-eds are trying to call out.
We're trying to get the political class to understand.
That our society is sick.
We're seeing more dying of young people than we've ever seen before.
And there's no concerted look into this.
There's no public investigation.
I know in this country, MP Andrew Bridgen had a hearing about excess mortality.
I'm sure that was censored and debunked, like you said, pre-bunked or debunked.
And it's shocking.
And, you know, the last thing I want to say about this, Russell, is you mentioned kind of like some information coming from the world of conspiracy theorists and then more into kind of maybe mainstream.
The way in which I've learned to articulate it is, I think of it as my goal throughout COVID has been bringing the private knowledge that us experts have gained and bringing it into common knowledge.
And that process, without people like you and other independent media prospects, is nearly impossible.
Because that dome of censorship around mass media, which is controlled by pharma, you can't bring inconvenient science around these products into general knowledge.
I really think that's what we have to do.
When you put it in those terms, Pierre, it's sort of comparable to the kind of hold that institutions such as the church held over the population in medieval times, when esoteric information, in particular scriptural analysis, was kept from the general population in order to prevent their enlightenment and their awakening.
Perhaps we're seeing something comparable now.
We were discussing that it's interesting that the media, who of course in certain areas are very vigorous in their investigation and pursuit of certain targets, often dissenting voices. Not
only are they not interested in amplifying this type of story or investigating this type of
story, these sorts of stories are being actively censored. We know that Moderna spent a
good deal of money, time, and resources tracking our action. We know that the
Department of Culture and Media in this country spent significant money supporting a group
called Logically AI that de-amplify and censor information in particular around the pandemic
period, the social regulations around it, and of course the medical mandates and
suggestions, if not mandates, around that So not only are these stories not being covered, they're being
Actively controlled and censored.
That I suppose further suggests that there is something significant at play.
Something potentially epochal and indeed that's why the conversation can't take place because if the conversation did take place what that conversation would lead to is a considerable reckoning.
Do you think that's true, Pierre?
100%.
I mean, I consider COVID to have been a war of information.
And it's really been a war against propaganda.
And, you know, I always have to remind myself and others, my favorite definition of propaganda, which comes from Professor Mark Crispin Miller, is he says propaganda is a story or a message.
To get you to think or act in a certain way.
And if you look at COVID, it's been nothing but these mass disseminated stories and messages that the vaccines are safe and effective, that you need to save grandma, so much of this behavioral psychology that's been practiced on us, to get us to do things that have really been directly opposed to our interests.
And that's why I'm here talking about it, because we're seeing death result.
This war of information, being fed bad information, essentially lies to propel the vaccine campaign, the competing pricey pharmaceutical products, the immense profits that they've gained, has been on the backs of scientific lies.
And also, like, lack of logic.
You know, to me, the thing that I think everyone needs to remind themselves is they, meaning the FDA, those in power, They disappeared natural immunity overnight.
Yeah.
Which is a bedrock of science.
We literally had countries around the world vaccinating people who just recovered from COVID.
And in many cases, they were being vaccinated with a spike protein from a variant that's two years old.
And so they're using old vaccines for people to recover.
Nothing made sense.
And I think people have to understand the corrupt control of our agencies, our medical journals, and the insane medical propaganda that was disseminated in order to support these campaigns and the immense profits that they realized.
You're right, we are engaged in an information war because I recall, Pierre, that another of the tropes that I was aware of, again just because of outspoken experts who at that point perhaps weren't even aware of the risks they were taking, who pontificated, well beyond pontificated, That you do not vaccinate during a pandemic.
Why can't we discuss natural immunity?
Of course, either Mectin, we'll discuss in more detail.
But what's extraordinary is that not only are the lessons of this period not being learned, the mistakes are being doubled down on.
This country has just passed the UK online safety bill that facilitates unprecedented censorship, of course, on the basis of protecting the vulnerable.
That's always how new tyrannies legitimize their Further centralisation of authoritarianism.
Canada has introduced comparable legislation.
Ireland is trying to introduce unprecedented measures.
And France has just made it illegal to criticise certain recommended medical measures.
But it's clearly, and it has indeed been dubbed, the article Pfizer.
Designed to prevent people from discussing or criticizing vaccines under threat of imprisonment of up to three years.
What does this tell us about the relationship between the pharmaceutical industry and the state?
And what appears to be taking place?
You must have speculated.
I mean, I know that you are a doctor, a scientist and a medical expert, but sociologically and in terms of power dynamics, something unprecedented appears to be taking place.
Well, you're right.
I'm not an expert in those areas, but I've sort of had to become one, because after discovering certain scientific truths by looking at the totality of the evidence around numerous topics with COVID, I've had to be faced with regular lies being issued from medical journals, media, newspapers, and out of the mouth of health care agencies.
And so you're left asking yourself, what is going on here?
And like you said, it's a war of information.
But I mean, these are just abject lies and we have to call them out.
And you mentioned briefly the suspicion and sense that there were financial motivations behind some
of the policies, discussions and amplified messaging.
We have your book here, The War on Ivermectin.
For a while, Ivermectin was censored as a term.
Along with natural immunity, vitamin D, exercise, fresh air, and good honest praise of nature and the Lord, Ivermectin became foreboding in and of itself.
It seems that whilst we were told that the orthodoxy that was under attack was science itself, Fauci of course famously said, I am science.
And as is often the case, ordinary people were cast as idiots of It isn't science that's being questioned, it's the corporatisation of science.
It's science as a subset of other imperatives.
Of course, true science would be an open analysis and examination of all of the data, including conflicting data, so that a proper conclusion might be reached.
How is the story of Ivermectin a good metric for understanding the corporatisation of science, the co-opting of science, Yeah, and I think it is the example.
It's sort of like what I was just saying, is that by becoming this expert, I understood, I had to look at what was wrong with society, because I knew what the truth was around Ivermectin.
But, you know, I wrote the book The War on Ivermectin, but one of my colleagues could have written the book The War on Hydroxychloroquine.
I mean, that was the first war.
Right.
And so there was a concerted effort to suppress and distort the evidence of efficacy for safe, available, repurposed drugs that are inexpensive and highly effective.
And so you saw this concerted campaign to attack it in order to preserve those corporate interests.
Let me just tell you kind of the inspiration I had for the book.
Actually, when I first had the inspiration, I didn't have a book in mind, I had a lecture in mind.
But what happened to me is, you may know this, I gave a testimony in the U.S.
Senate on the critical need for ivermectin.
Actually, I saw that.
That was right near the beginning of it.
Oh yeah, that's all just come making sense now.
And you know, that kind of went viral.
It kind of brought ivermectin as a topic around therapeutics.
Yeah!
Very soon after that, my life and those of my colleagues in my organization started to go sideways.
No, why?
What do you mean?
What happened?
Oh, I lost a job pretty immediately, my papers started getting retracted, that I'd passed peer review by expert scientists, four rounds of peer review, and we just got retracted from the journal.
Oh my God.
Yeah, a hit job started appearing in the media, fringe quack, radical anti-vaxxer.
Oh no.
And so I wasn't sure what was going on.
But here's my story, is that in March of 21, about four months later, I got an email from a researcher, actually an expert on vitamin D, his name's Professor William B. Grant.
Didn't know who he was, saw the email, it was two lines, it said, Dear Dr. Corey, what they're doing to ivermectin they've been doing to vitamin D for decades, and included a link to an article called The Disinformation Playbook.
I think if you haven't seen the article, it's a very quick read.
I think your listeners and viewers would love to read that, because I read it Where would we find this?
Disinformation playbook?
Oddly, if you put that in Google, it gets you right to the article.
It's written by an organization called the Union of Concerned Scientists, and it's published in 2017, but it outlines these five tactics.
That industries deploy when science emerges that's inconvenient to their interests.
Wow.
And they're named after American football plays, so it's the fake, the fix, the blitz, the screen, the diversion.
Cool.
And then they give you these examples, and I started to read it, and I suddenly... it's like I got the teacher's edition to the modern world, because suddenly everything made sense.
And I realized when I read that article... Did you give yourself chills?
A little bit.
Like more chills and light bulbs.
Like end of Usual Suspects.
Oh my god!
Shit!
Oh no!
It's Kevin Spacey!
You know, it's something on that, because it literally was a formative moment for me and in COVID.
Because I saw the descriptions of the tactics and I said, They've done that three times.
They did that yesterday.
They're doing that now.
And, for instance, one of them is called The Blitz.
It's where they go after researchers who are producing the inconvenient science.
And, for instance, one of the examples in that article about The Blitz, it's actually about the movie with Will Smith where he plays the pathologist who first described the disease that happened to retired American football players.
It's called chronic traumatic encephalopathy.
That pathologist wrote a paper, published a paper, His life went sideways, because he threatened the industry of the NFL.
By the way, the NFL industry is $9 billion.
Pharmaceutical industry, $1 trillion.
Oh, wow.
So basically, myself and my colleagues, Professor Paul Merrick, who founded the organization that we run together, we've all lost our jobs, our careers.
This is what happens.
We get blitzed.
What's pretty fascinating is that one gets the sense that scientists are approaching these subjects apolitically.
And like, oh listen, we've got this information you might be interested in.
Ivermectin as an antiparasitic could be useful in the...
You better shut the fuck up!
Then you realise that you've been living in a kind of illusion.
And it's astonishing, isn't it?
Because whether it's, say, the famous influence of the Sackler family over art institutions and their cultural influence and impact, for many years, surely the world of art Relished and reveled in the patronage, the long historic tradition of patronage between wealthy individuals and wealthy organizations and the arts, and suddenly we are forced to recognize that, oh, the amount of investment the big pharma makes in academia, the buildings, the studies, the clinical trials that are funded, and perhaps more significantly the clinical trials that are not funded, has always suggested control.
Control of the information.
These are the studies.
No one is conducting expensive trials into the efficacy of ivermectin because it's a generic and therefore not profitable drug.
I just did that thing where I tell experts the thing that they're experts on.
I do that as part of my job.
I go up to an expert and go, you know that thing you know a lot about?
I think you're pretty deeply studied, Russell.
I've listened to you before, so you're allowed.
Cheers, mate.
No one's going to be doing studies into vitamin D. Remember, this is interesting because, in a sense, we saw that Joe Rogan exploded into a global figure even more than he had already during this period.
Because I suppose just conversationally, like any autodidact with the forum he has, we're saying, well, shouldn't we all be going outside and exercising and eating healthy?
And like with the kind of enthusiasm that you've described with some of your own papers, hey, I took ivermectin and antimonoclomals or whatever that word was, you know, and it seems to have worked a treat and was, you know, experienced the the
insurance industry's revelations that can't be ignored.
They've got to the point where they go, listen, we can't keep insuring people at the same rate because they're dying at an unprecedented rate.
So the information... So now what has to happen is somehow that has to be either nullified or ameliorated.
Uh-oh!
The truth's out there.
Excess deaths is not a conspiracy theory.
It's real.
158,000.
That's more like... If that had been a single event, If that had been caused by a group of people with accents and turbans, this would be a big story.
But when it's caused by Big Pharma, let's just pretend this isn't happening.
You kind of articulated a few moments ago about that kind of deep, corrupt control of the pharmaceutical industry.
I have to tell you, before COVID, I don't know what your knowledge was before COVID.
I was not aware of the scope and the scale of the corruption.
Before COVID, I venerated the high-impact medical journals like New England Journal
of Medicine and Journal of American Medical Association, The Lancet, BMJ.
I mean, if it was published in those journals, I mean, that's the best science and the best
scientist.
I mean, that is scientific truth.
To get into those high-impact journals, I really admit that when this started, you're
going to be shocked at this, Russell, but I thought Fauci was like a sympathetic guy
in a tough spot with a lot of critics.
I kind of almost felt bad for him.
I was like, oh, he's doing the best he can.
This is what I thought.
I've said this before.
I've thought the New York Times was the paper of record, the arbiter of truth.
You really want to know what's going on, you read the New York Times.
The evidence that I have amassed over these last few years is none of those things are true.
Those journals are so completely run by the pharmaceutical industry, as are the agencies and its leaders.
I mean, everyone is working, as well as the media, they're all working in the interests of a massive, rapacious criminal industry.
And it's transformed our world.
And I call our country the United States of Pharma.
The influence of the pharmaceutical industry in the United States is unparalleled compared to any other industry at the level of legislation, media, like I said, science.
I used to think pharmaceutical corruption was like the free pens and trips and the attractive drug reps who come into the offices and buy lunch for the doctors.
I thought it was a kind of marketing corruption.
Marketing.
You know, that's what I thought.
This is before COVID.
Now I go a lot, lot deeper.
That's what it seemed like.
I mean, even my references to the Sackler family, of course, then, I'm a recovering drug addict myself, but the people that were dying because of the various ultra fentanyls and opioids, Well, these are just sort of drug addicts.
These are the kind of people we don't mind if they die.
Those sort of people, they're supposed to die.
This is almost population control.
It's convenient.
And like you say, the kind of somewhat innocuous presence of an attractive rep or a free bit of merch and a tidy pen has actually We've been exposed now as a veneer that concealed or at least distracted us from extraordinary control over the media, extraordinary control over the state, extraordinary control over our health and lives, unignorable corruption that amounts to an inversion of the stated purpose of such an industry, the wellness and well-being and health of Americans or the citizens indeed of the world.
I can't Envisage a more pronounced corruption than making people sick in order to make money Rather than getting people healthy In alignment with I don't know the Hippocratic Oath.
Yeah, I you know you that's the other realization some of my awakening evolution is I now have to be I now have to accept that there are literal sociopaths at the tops of many different industries and corporations who betray, show very little empathy for the common man.
You can show this immense data and see the death and destruction wrought by these policies and products.
They do not care.
And then, you know, your other point about this model of wanting to keep people ill.
Let's go back to that email about the disinformation playbook.
I've come to learn, looking at vitamin D science, they have been attacking vitamin D with the same tactics they use for ivermectin.
Because the book, Ivermectin, was inspired by that article.
And I kind of show, I decided that day I was going to document exactly what they're doing to ivermectin.
And I documented a wealth of references, citations for each one of those tactics.
uh... but they've been doing these tactics for years vitamin d especially
vitamin d they have been doing studies for decades in numbers of disease models
where pharmaceutical industry consistently gives the wrong form of vitamin d
too low a dose for vitamin d too late in the disease model and then they'll do it in
patients who aren't vitamin d deficient
So they never really test the importance of vitamin D, and then it gets as absurd as the normal reference levels for vitamin D is atrocious.
I think in our country it's 30 to 70.
I would never allow a patient of mine to have a vitamin D level of 35.
Minimum would be 50, and preferably much higher, but they have Artificially reduced vitamin D levels, because I gotta tell you, vitamin D is the symphony of the orchestra of our immune system, as well as surveillance for cancer.
You probably wouldn't get cancer if your vitamin D level was over 100.
Oh my god!
This is as threatening as knowledge as you can be, and actually, when you look to see, does vitamin D make a difference in rheumatoid arthritis, in cancer, in any disease, and you know what you'll conclude?
That it doesn't, because you look at all the studies, they all cancel each other out.
For every positive study, they come up with a negative study.
And so, that is disinformation in science, and that's one of the tactics which is called the fake.
Yeah, that's the fake, is it?
I'm gonna study this playbook thing, it sounds bloody brilliant.
I suppose, in a way, if your business model and its success is entirely contingent on people being sick and, for example, regularly getting cancer, and there is a cheap and effective way to prevent people getting cancer, you do not want that getting out there.
And something as sort of simple And as sort of almost flatly platitudinous as that is a kind of key that you can just unlock the corpus of this disgusting, cadaverous, parasitic, vampiric entity.
No wonder they're parasites.
No wonder they're anti-ivomectin, man.
Like, it just shows you the degree of corruption that we are confronted with.
Do you think, Pierre, That damage in science, excuse me, damage in the trust in science as a result of the behavior of bad actors using science as a kind of weapon has suffered.
Do you think people don't trust science in a way that's sort of more broad now?
100%, but I actually think that is a positive.
I think there's a huge portion of society now who realize the capacity for these authorities and these institutions of science to lie to us.
And I think that skepticism and that lack of trust is good, because it's going to protect people.
They're going to ask more questions.
They're not just going to blindly accept... Did you see this thing where we had CEOs of pharmaceutical companies getting national prime time?
and interviews on news that I've never seen that before.
And I'm an old lefty, by the way, not anymore.
But I mean, we used to hate big pharma.
And now we're giving them megaphones.
And so here's what I see.
In a lot of places I travel and lecture, I go to a lot of kind of medical freedom conferences.
So many people come up to me.
They are terrified of going to their doctor.
They don't want to go back to their primary care provider who's literally going to tell them to get the latest
booster, which has no scientific or safety evidence for that.
And so they don't trust physicians.
And I would say I feel bad for them, because I think they're very scared.
They feel like they can't get to those physicians who are--
awake and aware and is going to do fully informed consent and support them by educating them,
having that mutual collaborative debate or exchange about things instead of these monolithic
– passing on these recommendations from these corrupt agencies.
I don't think that's bad.
I think that's a start of something new.
The more people are awake and aware that the system is rotten and has been captured, the
more I think we have an ability to start building a new one or a parallel one.
I will say that's what my organization, the FLCC, is trying to do.
We're trying to be a source for a… Objective, conflict of interest-free guidance on any number of areas of health.
We're not just, you know, addressing COVID.
We're actually addressing treatments for cancer, repurposed drugs for cancer, depression, diabetes, health.
And so we're hoping that that's going to start a movement towards people getting better information and taking better care of themselves.
In a real free society people will be able to appoint your board as the board that guides their medical well-being as opposed to corrupt organizations that are proven to take money whether in the form of royalties or donations or funding like the FDA or NIH.
We'd be able to say oh I don't like as if it would be a football team or something you just go I'll go with these dudes because I trust them and I don't think that they are ultimately working for I'll tell you our organization has had incredible amount of support from all around the world.
Our protocols, remember that's what we came together as five pulmonary and critical care specialists.
We saw the onset of a pulmonary and critical care disease enveloping the world and we built our first protocol in March of 2020 addressing the hospital.
Is pulmonary a relationship between heart and lungs?
Is that what that means?
It's the lungs.
Cardiology is hard, and pulmonary is... maybe it's respirology, maybe in the UK.
I think that's what they call it in Canada.
But pulmonary is what we call it.
And critical care is ICU medicine.
I'm an expert at dealing with life-threatening illness in the intensive care unit, and both of those were true with COVID.
And we came together, and all we sought to do is put together the most effective treatment protocols.
And I'll tell you, our first protocol did great in the ICU.
What was it?
We called it Math Plus.
It was centered around the use of methylprednisolone, which was a corticosteroid, which, by the way, I also testified in the Senate in May of 2020 about the critical need for corticosteroids.
And I did that at a time when every national and international health care organization was saying not to use it.
And after I gave that recommendation in a Senate hearing, I was harassed by my university.
They did not want me to talk to the press anymore.
I was accused of malpractice, of killing people.
And just want to record reflect, two months later, it became the standard of care worldwide.
So our early identification for the need of corticosteroids was correct, as was ivermectin.
But at that time, we also had ascorbic acid, which is vitamin C. So we had high dose IV vitamin C.
We had another important vitamin called thiamine, which we gave intravenously, and then heparin, which is a blood thinner.
So we had the anti-inflammatory components and the anti-cladding components very early on, and we saw patients do very well if they were treated early enough.
And we tried to put that out in media, but everywhere we went, nobody wanted to talk about a protocol unless we did a randomized controlled trial first.
That's science today.
The culture must have somehow been thirsty for the edicts that were so blindly accepted.
There must have been some open wound for people to so willingly accept the mandates, I don't mean just in terms of vaccine mandates, but the sort of mandated ideology.
It was extraordinary that people were so willing to foreclose on simple discourse and simple discussion to apply what would previously have been regarded as evangelical and religious mindsets to the antithetical subject of science, which is meant to be, this is not conjecture, this is not belief, This is empiricism.
We have measured.
We have trialled.
We have reviewed and analysed.
That process ought be uncorruptible.
Of course, as you have described in your Vitamin D example, if there are financial interests or interests of dominion, control and power behind this process of empiricism, what will be established is a method for conducting trials that have predetermined outcomes.
Wait a second, Russell, you didn't read the Disinformation Playbook yet, but the definition, one of the definitions of the fake is actually conducting trials with predetermined results, and they are expert at that, and I detail all of the ways in which they did that in Ivermectin.
Now, Ivermectin has a hundred controlled trials, but I have a chapter in my book called The Big Six.
It was really six trials that turned everything.
They were large trials funded by big national health agencies, And the brazenness with the misconduct and manipulations of those trials just to try to show that ivermectin didn't work.
They all succeeded at obtaining a non-statistically significant benefit.
They all concluded that ivermectin shouldn't be used.
But if you look at all the other trials besides those six, which are a hundred, and you mass all the data together, you find incredible large magnitude reductions in everything.
Death, hospitalization, time to recovery.
This whole thing of ivermectin, it was a disinformation tactic using trials with predetermined results published in the highest impact journals in the world.
The trials were so poorly conducted, there was so much fraud that was brazenly obvious from their methods, but yet they sailed to publication in those journals.
And that's really where I'm not the same physician anymore.
I'm completely estranged from medicine because now I'm aware of the deep level of corruption, We have been cast into a kind of desert, those of us that have experienced this, and you do not come out of that desert the same man.
A different man comes out.
After you've experienced these tactics, After you have been the subject of these powers, after you have awakened to the righteousness in not trusting corporatized science, not trusting legacy media, not trusting the co-opted state judiciary or any of its tools of power and control.
In a sense you have to call upon something else to support you.
What are your views?
It's my new network of colleagues and lay people that we've come together.
We understand these things that you just listed, and we're looking for a better way.
We want to stay positive, open, honest, transparent, debate, and I got to tell you, I love my life now.
I'd say the journey from my old life to this one was really rocky.
My academic career, which was a pretty celebrated career, ended and that was pretty rough for me.
But I like where I've landed.
I've landed with just the best group of people.
Awake, critical thinkers who are trying to do the right thing.
We're trying to help those that We've left behind.
I don't know if left behind is the right one, but those who are still, I think, a little too trusting of a lot of institutions that are lying to them, and I feel bad for them.
I want to protect them.
That's what I'm trying to do here.
I was a medical educator all my life.
I'm trying to do the same, but now I'm doing it in society rather than in the bowels of a hospital or in a lecture hall in a medical school.
Yeah, because this is what's necessary.
Perhaps we will see that amidst the obvious corruption of this pandemic period, there was a kind of avatar at work.
A force that needed various agents to act on its behalf, ensuring that precisely what you're describing takes place.
That which was esoteric becomes exoteric.
That which was inaccessible becomes plainly understood.
That which was concealed becomes revealed.
That sounds really like a mission.
I really think our numbers are growing, and you know, like my friend Del Bigtree says, we are winning.
He's been in this fight to bring out truth on various aspects of medicines and vaccines for many years, and he's never seen a time like this.
I mean, the amount of people who've come into the fold who are aware and are continuing to fight to get these truths out is truly remarkable, and I've got to tell you, it's inspiring.
Yeah, it's exciting.
Thank you so much for writing this book.
We want to learn more about the FLCCC Alliance.
Let's do a post about that so we can learn more about it.
I presume there's a sort of a website where people can... FLCCC.net.
Excellent.
We'll learn more about that.
Thank you so much for your fantastic work.
It's such a pleasure to meet you.
As you were talking, I was like, oh yeah, I see those hearings on the telly!
I'll start to get excited about it.
Visibly, you'll be able to spot the moment.
Export Selection