TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

Former employees acknowledge the significant influence of the pharmaceutical industry on media. They argue that shaping the message allows them to shape the world. They highlight the use of Ivermectin in various countries, including India and Argentina, where it has shown success in treating COVID-19. However, others dismiss its effectiveness and label it as a horse dewormer. The speakers criticize the pharmaceutical industry for manipulating clinical studies and influencing research grants. They also express concerns about censorship and the withholding of information, which they believe misleads the public.

The speaker discusses their personal decision to take Ivermectin and criticizes the corporate media for spreading misinformation. They claim that Ivermectin has been proven effective against COVID-19 and mention studies supporting its use. They express distrust in vaccines and accuse big pharma of lying. The speaker also mentions a fake news story about Ivermectin filling hospitals and introduces an investigative journalist who will expose the hoax. They promote various products from infowarsstore.com and urge viewers to take action before potential future shortages. The speaker concludes by mentioning the availability of turmeric concentrate, deep crystal iodine, living defense, palm and block, and a new charcoal activated toothpaste.

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.

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.

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.

In Pierre Corre's book The War on Ivermectin, an accidental natural experiment is described. A natural experiment is explained as a situation where nature creates varying conditions that allow analysis without controlled experimentation. The book reports 80 court cases in which families sued hospitals to force ivermectin treatment for desperately ill relatives. In 40 cases, courts granted the request and ivermectin was administered; in the other 40, courts refused and no ivermectin was given. Among the cases where ivermectin was given, 38 patients survived and 2 died. Among the cases where ivermectin was not given, 2 patients survived and 38 died. The presenter notes that he cannot vouch for the data itself since it is not published in a scientific paper and the court cases cannot be independently checked, but presumes the data is accurate and states he knows Pierre well and believes he didn’t fabricate it. A chi-squared calculation, validated by two different AIs, yields a p-value of 5.03 × 10^-15, indicating an extraordinarily high level of statistical significance. The presenter emphasizes that “the chances of a result that strong if ivermectin does not work are something like the chances of you guessing a random 15 digit number on the first try,” calling the result “through the roof.” It is noted that CNN framed the topic as a veterinary medicine issue, which the presenter finds ironic. The broader point is that the ivermectin story, and repurposed drug use more generally, is an important puzzle piece: if repurposed drugs had been allowed to be used through the normal medical process—where doctors evaluate patients, consider symptoms, and pool information with other doctors—COVID could have been an entirely manageable disease for all but the most compromised individuals. The presenter concludes that there was no important pandemic.

Joe Rogan states he doesn't need the vaccine because his immunity is better, having recovered from COVID in one day and testing negative five days later with natural antibodies. Rogan accuses CNN of lying by saying he took "horse dewormer." He clarifies that a doctor prescribed him ivermectin, a human drug, along with other medications. He notes that the drug has been given to billions of people and that one of its inventors won a Nobel Prize. Rogan plays a CNN clip that reports he was treated with ivermectin, "a drug used for livestock," and accuses the network of using a yellow filter to make him look bad. He says the network is defaming him by lying about him taking horse medication. Rogan questions why the network isn't reporting that he tested negative five days later and was back in the gym six days after infection. He suggests that if the news network lies about a comedian taking horse medication, people will get concerned about the veracity of the news.

The speakers discuss the politicization of Ivermectin, an antiparasitic drug that also shows potential in stopping viral replication. They mention its success in treating yellow fever and winning the Nobel Prize. They express confusion over why a drug would be demonized and politicized. The conversation touches on the motivations behind this, including the desire to create a monopoly for vaccines and the Emergency Use Authorization Act. They highlight the affordability and accessibility of Ivermectin, which can be manufactured by anyone and costs only 7¢ per dose. The speakers also mention the discouragement and suppression of alternative treatments like monoclonal antibodies.

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.

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.

The speaker claims that the public had limited access to data when the vaccines received emergency use authorization. They believe regulators, who they consider corrupt, were determined to push forward with the mass vaccination program. The speaker argues that effective therapeutic medicines like Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin were intentionally suppressed to pave the way for vaccine authorization. They explain that a federal law prohibits emergency use authorization for a vaccine if there is an existing licensed drug that proves effective against the same disease. The speaker suggests that this decision was driven by financial interests, with the NIH owning half the patent for the Moderna vaccine and individuals associated with Anthony Fauci potentially receiving significant royalties.

Billions of people have taken the medication worldwide. The speaker questions why the news network lied about him taking horse dewormer, stating they shouldn't have. The interviewer did not ask about this, and the speaker regrets not clarifying before the interview.

Joe Rogan announced on social media that he has COVID and mentioned taking Ivermectin as part of his treatment. However, Ivermectin is primarily used as a dewormer for horses and is not proven to be effective against COVID. In fact, it can be dangerous and potentially deadly. The CDC and FDA have issued warnings against using Ivermectin for COVID. Some doctors claim that Ivermectin is effective and have faced backlash for advocating its use. There are allegations that pharmaceutical companies and the media have influenced the narrative against Ivermectin due to financial interests. Studies on Ivermectin have shown mixed results, but some countries have reported success in using it to treat COVID.

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.

Some people are refusing the COVID vaccine and instead taking horse dewormer, which has no evidence of effectiveness and can be dangerous. The speaker got COVID and tried various medications, including Ivermectin, which is commonly used for deworming horses. The mention of Ivermectin as a horse dewormer is not flattering. The speaker believes there is clear evidence that Ivermectin can be effective and that people should be informed about it.

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.

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.

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.

There is a growing problem of people using a drug meant for animals to treat COVID-19. This false information started with a viral video from a group called America's frontline doctors, claiming that hydroxychloroquine could cure COVID. They later started promoting another drug called Ivermectin as a cure for COVID, despite warnings from the CDC, FDA, and other health organizations that it is not effective and could be harmful. Ivermectin is actually meant to prevent parasites in animals like horses. It's important to rely on approved treatments and vaccines to prevent COVID-19.

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.

The speaker expresses frustration with CNN for portraying them as taking horse medication and conspiring against them. They argue that the medication, ivermectin, is commonly used by humans and has even won a Nobel Prize for its efficacy in humans. They believe that there is a deliberate effort to discredit ivermectin and other medications like hydroxychloroquine to ensure the success of the vaccine industry, which is worth billions of dollars.

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.

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.

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 speaker expresses frustration that COVID vaccines are still recommended for those most likely to be injured by them. They claim Vinay Prasad, now at the FDA, attacked them on ivermectin, stating it doesn't work and that "turbo cancer" is not a thing. The speaker believes there is denial regarding the mRNA technology and its potential link to aggressive cancers, as well as ivermectin's potential as a solution. They suggest that admitting the mRNA vaccines may be causing cancer and that ivermectin may be a solution could force the shutdown of the mRNA technology. The speaker claims there are numerous publications suggesting the vaccines may be causing aggressive "turbo cancers." They state the new Trump administration doesn't want to abandon the mRNA technology, complicating the use of ivermectin, fenbendazole, and benzoyl in cancer treatment due to a lack of support.