TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker discusses how CNN portrayed them as taking horse medication, specifically Ivermectin, which is actually a medication used more commonly in humans. They mention that Ivermectin has been prescribed to billions of people and even won a Nobel Prize for its efficacy in humans. The speaker believes that Ivermectin had to be discredited because of a federal law that states emergency use authorization for vaccines cannot be issued if there is an existing medication proven effective against the target illness. They argue that acknowledging the effectiveness of Ivermectin would have jeopardized the multi-billion dollar vaccine industry.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
Ivermectin is a versatile drug with antiviral and anti-inflammatory properties that stimulate healing processes like autophagy and improve the microbiome. It is effective for early COVID treatment and vaccine injuries, and is affordable as a generic drug. Despite misconceptions, it is not a horse dewormer and has been available for as little as 2¢ per tablet through the WHO.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker discusses a CNN segment where they portrayed him as taking horse medication. He criticizes the repeated claims and believes it shows a conspiracy. He clarifies that the medication, Ivermectin, is commonly used in humans and has even won a Nobel Prize for its efficacy. The speaker suggests that Ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine were discredited to protect the vaccine industry, as federal law prohibits emergency use authorization if there is an existing effective medication. Acknowledging the effectiveness of these medications would have jeopardized the multi-billion dollar vaccine enterprise.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker discusses a CNN segment where they portrayed him as taking horse medication. He believes this is evidence of a conspiracy, as the medication in question, Ivermectin, is commonly used in humans and has even won a Nobel Prize for its efficacy. He suggests that Ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine were discredited to protect the vaccine industry, as federal law prohibits emergency use authorization for vaccines if there are existing effective medications. Acknowledging the effectiveness of these medications would have undermined the multi-billion dollar vaccine industry.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
200 congresspeople have been treated with Ivermectin for COVID, which was a common off-label treatment before vaccines were available. The motivation behind the negative perception of this medication is unclear, but it may relate to financial interests since Ivermectin is a generic drug with a low cost of about 30 cents per dose.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
The video discusses the FDA's Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) process and the controversy surrounding the use of Ivermectin as a potential treatment for COVID-19. It highlights the financial interests of pharmaceutical companies and the geopolitical implications of widespread access to a cheap and widely available medicine like Ivermectin. The video also questions the safety claims made by Merck, the company that holds the expired patent for Ivermectin. It emphasizes the need for critical evaluation of articles and information that may be influenced by financial motives.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker expresses frustration with monoclonal antibodies: "They worked very well" and "They were not controversial." Initially, they were readily available: "I could get as many doses as I wanted. I mean, show up at my doorstep the next day. And it was great." After the government took over distribution, access declined, leading me to use ivermectin: "I turned to ivermectin." "But, you know, in my opinion, they did that on purpose." They claim the government did that "to encourage people to take the the COVID shot." They assert timing: "If you look at the timing, in March, the government put out the big information on ivermectin and why you should not take it for COVID. They put that on the FDA's website." They reference "COVID-nineteen Community Core," launched "04/01/2021," described as "an $11,500,000,000 slush fund to propaganda, to feed out propaganda."

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker discusses a CNN segment where they portrayed him as taking horse medication. He believes this is evidence of a conspiracy, as the medication in question, Ivermectin, is commonly used in humans and has even won a Nobel Prize for its efficacy. The speaker suggests that Ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine were discredited to protect the vaccine industry, as federal law prohibits emergency use authorization for vaccines if there are existing effective medications. Acknowledging the effectiveness of these medications would have undermined the multi-billion dollar vaccine industry.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
Two hundred congresspeople have been treated with ivermectin for COVID. I did not know that. You could probably find it on doctor Pierre Corey’s Twitter page. Before there were vaccines, this was a common treatment, an off-label treatment for COVID. I do not know what the motivation for demonizing this particular medication is. Again, I’m not a doctor, and I’m not a scientist. But I would imagine some of it has to do with money. The reason being is that it is a generic drug now. They’ve the patent has run out. So anybody can make it, and it’s worth, like, 30¢ a dose.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
Ivermectin, a drug discovered in the late seventies, has had a significant positive impact on billions of people worldwide. However, it has been wrongly portrayed as a horse poison. Despite being one of the safest drugs in history, Dr. Fauci claims it is dangerous. Similarly, hydroxychloroquine is dismissed as dangerous without proper evidence. Stephen Colbert, a propagandist, dismisses the effectiveness of these drugs without acknowledging their Nobel Prize-winning status and inclusion on the WHO list of essential medicines. This misinformation is fueled by their financial ties to Pfizer, leading them to deceive the public.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
The discussion centers on ivermectin and various claims about its origins, promotion, and effects. One speaker asserts that ivermectin is made by big pharma, specifically naming Merck and vaccine companies, and that people are using it because influencers told the public to take pharmaceutical pills after the pandemic, while not disclosing that cell phone towers are in front of their houses. The speaker claims that people took ivermectin instead, and states that ivermectin is linked to liver toxicity, jaundice, brain damage, and infertility, suggesting these risks are part of a broader strategy to reduce fertility in the population. The other speaker counters by describing ivermectin as having productive toxicity, noting this is observed in animal studies, including rabbits and other mammals, and rejecting the idea that its toxicity is limited to arthropods like crabs or cockroaches. This speaker claims it is a well-proven reproductive toxic substance for many mammals. They reference another video discussing the neurotoxic effect of ivermectin and mention that veterinarians discuss routine use and continued use of ivermectin, associating it with various adverse outcomes.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
The video discusses the controversy surrounding the use of Ivermectin as a treatment for COVID-19. While some claim it is a safe and effective medicine, others argue that it is a horse dewormer with no clinical evidence of its efficacy. The video highlights the smear campaign against Ivermectin and suggests that powerful forces, including pharmaceutical companies, may be suppressing its use. It also mentions the positive results seen in countries like India and Peru where Ivermectin was used as part of a multi-drug approach. The video raises concerns about the influence of pharmaceutical companies on the media and the manipulation of clinical studies. Overall, it presents Ivermectin as a potentially effective treatment that has been unfairly maligned.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker claims ivermectin is part of a diabolical Rockefeller plan devised in 2010, predicting people would reject vaccines after 2020 and turn to another pharmaceutical. They question ivermectin’s safety by listing side effects such as blindness, liver failure, and infertility. They argue the Rockefellers own the entire medical system worldwide, so buying from a different country is ineffective. The discussion notes ads for pharmaceuticals on alternative-health platforms, suggesting a marketing push. They say parasites are really heavy metals in the body, and that ivermectin contains heavy metals. The claim is that ivermectin, like antibiotics, suppresses symptoms. They describe a $32,000,000,000 industry fueled by this narrative, and when they researched producers, they found Merck, Johnson and Johnson, Pfizer, and Bayer. The same companies making vaccines in 2020 allegedly also make ivermectin, framing it as a bait-and-switch.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
Ivermectin, a Nobel Prize-winning anti-parasitic drug, has been vilified. Merck, who held the patent until 1996, claims it doesn't work for COVID-19. However, Merck has a 50/50 partnership with Moderna on mRNA cancer vaccines. Because Merck will make billions on mRNA cancer vaccines, they have no interest in investigating ivermectin for cancer. There is evidence that high-dose ivermectin is effective in treating many types of cancers.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
200 congresspeople have reportedly been treated with Ivermectin for COVID, which was a common off-label treatment before vaccines were available. The motivation behind the negative perception of this medication is unclear, but it may be linked to financial interests. Ivermectin is a generic drug with a low cost of around 30 cents per dose, as its patent has expired, allowing anyone to produce it.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
Like hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin are no are out of patents. So because they're out of patents, you cannot make any money on these drugs. The most you could sell them for is, $300 Pharmaceutical companies are no longer interested in $300 drugs. They're interested in orphan drugs where they can get name your price for a drug. We're going to put it under an orphan and now we can bill whatever we want. From like $300 to $10,000 a month. Then all these companies started copying and doing biologic at $10,000 a month. But there is a movement that is controlling the research and stopping innovations, that is stopping out of patent drugs, drugs that are basically like hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin. So I think that's the number one thing and the attacks on that.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
Monoclonal antibodies worked very well and quickly, and were initially readily available. The speaker believes the government intentionally made them harder to get to encourage people to take the COVID shot. The speaker started using ivermectin when monoclonal antibodies became difficult to obtain. In March, the government put out information on the FDA's website about why people should not take ivermectin for COVID. Simultaneously, the government launched COVID-nineteen Community Core on 04/01/2021, an $11,500,000,000 slush fund for propaganda.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 1 notes that ivermectin has broken through to the public sphere beyond COVID and is now discussed for many diseases. Speaker 0 asks where ivermectin stands in the scientific and medical community today and what other use cases exist for the medicine. Speaker 1 responds that thousands of doctors follow their data; 18,000 GI doctors see their data when they publish or present at the American College of Gastroenterology. Word-of-mouth in the medical community is a major form of marketing, with one doctor speaking to another. Referencing the COVID era, Speaker 1 mentions corruption and retractions, then describes ivermectin as having created a healthcare revolution where doctors have lined up to work to see other benefits of ivermectin without needing to ask permission to treat patients. A whole branch of healthcare is moving away from the same institute that Speaker 1 helped create drugs to market with his sisters. He says a group of doctors who had sponsored or helped pharma are turning away from pharma and exploring other methods to treat patients. He states his job is to unite doctors to see the truth, while bringing pharma back to being righteous and stopping data manipulation and scientist censorship. Speaker 1 references his book, Let’s Talk SH.T, acknowledging he could be wrong and challenging others to prove him wrong and reproduce the data to retract the hypothesis or paper. He emphasizes that the scientific process should be followed, especially when everything was done by the book and as well as he could. He adds that the research was not funded by others; it was funded by his savings. He created the microbiome research foundation with the goal of raising money to study kids with autism and to push an IND to the FDA, which cost about $600,000 to obtain FDA approval. He clarifies that no external party paid for this work, and he continues to struggle to raise funds to treat poor autistic kids who cannot afford expensive stool testing, drugs, and vitamins; they need help and everyone should step in to assist these kids. Speaker 1 concludes that their focus is fixing autism, with the aim of later addressing Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s, and cancer.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
The FDA issues emergency use authorization for medical products when there are no approved alternatives. The effectiveness of Ivermectin as a treatment is questioned, as it would have affected the authorization of vaccines. Powerful forces with financial interests oppose Ivermectin, as it threatens global vaccination policies. Pharmaceutical companies like Pfizer, BioNTech, and Moderna have made significant profits from COVID-19 vaccines. Ivermectin is a cheap and widely available drug, but its safety is disputed by Merck, despite distributing it when it was under patent. It is important to be cautious of articles that may be biased or paid for.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
The speakers discuss the exposure of mainstream media and how it tries to dismiss and discredit them. They mention the framing of Ivermectin as horse medicine and find it amusing. They clarify that they took Ivermectin based on the judgment of a medical professional and list other medications they used for COVID treatment. They mention that 200 congresspeople have also been treated with Ivermectin. They speculate that the demonization of Ivermectin may be motivated by financial interests since it is a generic drug. The video ends with the information that Ivermectin costs around 30¢ per dose.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
The video discusses the controversy surrounding the use of Ivermectin as a treatment for COVID-19. While some claim it is a safe and effective medicine, others argue that it is a horse dewormer with no clinical evidence of its efficacy. The video highlights the experiences of doctors who have faced backlash for advocating for Ivermectin and suggests that powerful forces, including pharmaceutical companies, may be suppressing its use. It also mentions studies and success stories from countries like Peru, India, and Japan where Ivermectin has been used effectively. The video raises concerns about the influence of pharmaceutical companies on media and academic research. Overall, it presents Ivermectin as a potentially valuable treatment option that has been unfairly maligned.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker discusses a CNN segment where they portrayed him as taking horse medication. He argues that this portrayal is a clear indication of a conspiracy, as the medication in question, Ivermectin, is commonly used in humans and has even won a Nobel Prize for its efficacy in humans. The speaker believes that Ivermectin had to be discredited in order to promote the COVID-19 vaccines, as federal law prohibits emergency use authorization for vaccines if there is an existing effective medication. Acknowledging Ivermectin's effectiveness would have jeopardized the multi-billion dollar vaccine industry.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker discusses the use of various drugs, including hydroxychloroquine, Ivermectin, colchicine, doxycycline, Azithromycin, budesonide, prednisone, and enoxaparin, for treating COVID-19. They mention that these drugs were considered lightning rods, particularly hydroxychloroquine, which faced strong opposition. The speaker questions why authorities would prevent the use of these drugs if they were not believed to be effective, and highlights the safety profile of Ivermectin. They suggest that people should be allowed to try these drugs if they are willing to pay for them. The motive behind targeting these drugs is unclear.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker believes that Ivermectin's effectiveness threatened the emergency use authorization for vaccines, which would impact the global market worth over $100 billion. The speaker suggests that Ivermectin's low cost and availability posed a threat to patented pharmaceuticals like PAXLOVID and Molnupiravir. They argue that Ivermectin could have ended the pandemic if widely used, but was suppressed due to its potential impact on the market. Translation: The speaker suggests that Ivermectin's effectiveness posed a threat to the emergency use authorization for vaccines and the global market, potentially impacting billions in revenue. They argue that Ivermectin's affordability and availability could have ended the pandemic if widely used, but was suppressed due to its potential impact on the market.

The Joe Rogan Experience

Joe Rogan Experience #1671 - Bret Weinstein & Dr. Pierre Kory
Guests: Bret Weinstein, Dr. Pierre Kory
reSee.it Podcast Summary
Bret Weinstein and Joe Rogan discuss the urgent need for an emergency podcast regarding COVID-19 treatments, particularly focusing on ivermectin. Dr. Pierre Kory, a lung and ICU specialist, introduces himself as part of a group that developed treatment protocols for COVID-19, emphasizing their expertise in ivermectin's use against the virus. Weinstein shares his background as an evolutionary biologist and how he and his wife, Heather, began analyzing COVID-19 data early in the pandemic. They encountered evidence suggesting ivermectin's effectiveness, which led to their discussions and research on the topic. Dr. Kory explains that their group, the Frontline COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance, was formed to create treatment protocols based on extensive research. He mentions initial studies showing ivermectin's efficacy in cell cultures, which prompted some regions to use it clinically despite the lack of human trials at that time. The conversation shifts to the censorship faced by Weinstein and Kory on platforms like YouTube, where their discussions about ivermectin have led to strikes and video removals. They highlight the inconsistency in guidelines from health organizations like the CDC and WHO regarding treatments and vaccinations, particularly around the use of remdesivir and the evolving understanding of airborne transmission of the virus. Dr. Kory points out the disparity between the WHO's recommendations and the evidence supporting ivermectin, noting that the drug is inexpensive and widely available, unlike newer, patented treatments. They express concern over the influence of pharmaceutical companies on treatment guidelines and the potential for profit-driven motives to overshadow public health. Weinstein emphasizes the importance of open discussion in science, arguing that censorship prevents the sharing of critical information that could save lives. They discuss the implications of ignoring effective treatments like ivermectin, particularly in the context of the ongoing pandemic and the need for early intervention. Dr. Kory shares success stories from countries like Mexico and India, where ivermectin has been used effectively to reduce hospitalization and death rates. They stress the need for a coordinated approach to treatment that includes ivermectin and other repurposed drugs. The discussion concludes with a call for transparency and the importance of allowing scientific discourse to flourish without censorship. They express hope that the evidence supporting ivermectin will eventually lead to its broader acceptance and use in treating COVID-19.
View Full Interactive Feed