TrailSite News Blasts Medical Censorship!!, 3710

Good afternoon. I’m still reporting on the coup!

TrialSite News in a short period of time has become THE leading journal which reads most of the medical journals and distills out the most important findings from them. It is intended for a medical audience, but written in a style that most people with a high-school education have no trouble understanding.

They are a fair and honest in their reporting and have been on the leading edge of reporting on legitimate COVID studies, as well as the MSM fake news which has in unison downplayed any studies showing efficacy for cheap, legacy drugs in treating COVID.

In Saturday’s edition, they blasted Twitter for wiping the Twitter account of British researcher, Tess Lawrie for mentioning the forbidden word – Ivermectin. This is so good, so reasonable, that I’m just going to read it to you, without my traditional quotes pages, but from here on, this is all a quote from TrialSite News as it blasts the political and economic conspirators who have tarnished the reputation of medicine in general for generations to come.

Tess Lawrie is perhaps one of the sweetest, most intelligent, and caring people we know. She is a committed, dedicated, and passionate health professional who cares about patients, with a particular proclivity to helping the poor worldwide. An expert in developing medical evidence, she founded the UK’s Evidence Based Medicine Consultancy and has advised many prominent health agencies such as the World Health Organization.
With sorrow and some anger, we report the organization she helped launch—British Ivermectin Recommendation Development or more commonly known as the “BIRD” Group—was just eradicated from the memories of Twitter.
At this point, the line has been crossed. Social technology companies like Twitter and Facebook, which have all but monopolized communications, have turned into levers for a particular government imperative—all hinting of imminent authoritarianism.

Controlling and overcoming COVID-19 is merely the cover to a deeper, nefarious, far-reaching power grab. TrialSite’s emphasis has always been to pursue the truth in biomedical and health-related research—for the patient, the doctor, and healthcare professional involved with care or research; the investor and/or drug sponsor or whoever else needs to understand a particular investigational therapy, research center or an industry sponsor. But when a committed scientist’s work is just wiped out because a preprogrammed algorithm doesn’t like the word ivermectin, then TrialSite must publicly acknowledge that war has been declared. This is an information war, and whatever topic or subject doesn’t fit neatly into what the current administration approves is conveniently removed. When this is done at the request of the executive branch, it crosses into Constitutional violation territory.

Jen Psaki was very clear at that White House press meeting back in July that the White House assigned high-level staffers interacting with the tech companies such as Facebook and Twitter to flag what they deemed misinformation. A chilling move, Psaki should be removed immediately for orchestrating such blatant disregard of Constitutional boundaries. And who are they to declare what is true and what is not?

What law affords a few staffers in the White House the ultimate authority to direct or strongly influence near communication monopolies to allow some information to live on and other information to die? This isn’t anything close to science but the makings of a government-medical authoritarian power grab.

Ivermectin is a great drug that has saved hundreds of millions of lives thanks to the Mectizan program.

As much as we are angered with Merck’s unacceptable antics dismissing their own product because they received hundreds of millions to develop a branded antiviral targeting COVID-19, they are to be celebrated for that life-changing program—where they donate the ivermectin, known as the “Wonder drug.” The two scientists that discovered the drug just received the Nobel Prize a handful of years ago! Of course, Fact Checkers had to come and declare that this doesn’t prove its effectiveness against COVID-19—but no one claims that. TrialSite attests that we have followed ivermectin studies longer than anyone out there, interviewed more doctors and researchers, and have never declared it’s a certainty….

Sixty-five studies, [see ivmmeta.com] as of this writing, investigated the use of ivermectin targeting COVID-19. The consensus among doctors involved that we interviewed suggests that the drug is not, of course, a magical cure (there are none for COVID-19), or even a certainty, but the drug seemed to help millions of people disrupt the viral replication while somehow impacting inflammation.

There is plenty of research and real-world evidence that the drug seems to help. But a cadre of federal health authorities, academicians, and industry summarily discounted any positive results (which were the majority of studies), declaring the studies were improperly designed, not statistically powered, or any excuse they could find.

Instead, they turned their attention to a couple of questionable studies indicating neutral response and improper, fudged data in one Egyptian case.

They never cared about the good studies, which frankly mostly come from developing, Brown-skinned countries. That elitism with tinges of underlying racism exists among the health elite of America is clear. They have scorn for the real world, for empowered doctors and providers/researchers in low-to-middle-income countries (LMICs) attempting to solve health problems in real-time. Their false sense of superiority—and comfort—doesn’t allow them to demonstrate any curiosity as to what could be working in some parts of the world. The fact that ivermectin was used as a key public health tool in India’s largest state—Uttar Pradesh—is censored and summarily rejected by Fact Checkers.

We certainly found misrepresentation, obfuscation, and lies coming out of the mainstream press—that this drug was dangerous and thus any mention of it should be banned. Actually, the drug is safe if used as prescribed by a licensed competent doctor—similar to the safety record of aspirin. However, like most over-the-counter drugs, misuse can cause problems. The same happens with alcohol, where dozens die a day from alcohol poisoning—but do we ban it? No, actually, we celebrate it with commercials all the time.

Much of the press, the FDA, the CDC, and the American Medical Center used a report from the American Association of Poison Control Center (AAPCC) declaring that calls concerning ivermectin increased three-fold. That’s correct. We obtained and analyzed that data and found 80% of those calls were nothing, and only 1% (11) were serious—it wasn’t clear if there was hospitalization involved. However, it certainly resulted from self-medication with the veterinary variety of the drug….

We discovered that during the pandemic no one died from ivermectin (no one involved with the AAPCC calls at least), while at least four people died from swallowing hand sanitizer. Yet this report was the basis for the CDC and AMA to prevent access!
Tess Lawrie’s BIRD, the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC), and other groups don’t promote the use of veterinary ivermectin at all.

Doctors actually prescribing off-label did so legally and safely. So all the tactics to instill FUD (Fear Uncertainty and Doubt) sought first to conflate the legitimate use of ivermectin off-label (e.g., a licensed doctor writes a prescription to a consenting patient) for COVID-19 and the consumer buying an animal product and self-medicating.

But shame on the authorities, academicians, medical societies, and those in the industry that care about money, status and power over patient care to indirectly conspire to initiate a very well-orchestrated anti-ivermectin campaign.

Dr. Anthony Fauci is at the top of this shameful list. He has built a powerful fiefdom in the NIH—no one dares critique him lest they won’t receive any grants. But remember that’s taxpayer money, and Fauci is nothing more than a federal bureaucrat working for us.
Through fear and the use of alarmism, pharmacies are now afraid to prescribe the drug. TrialSite has reported that it becomes far more difficult to access the drug for off-label use.

The Biden administration has taken other questionable measures with monoclonal antibodies. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) took over the supply of those investigational therapies early in September because just a few states were using most of the supply. That’s actually because a few states had a great majority of the very ill people. The move smells rotten—of political motion.

The government probably cannot do a better job than the marketplace in efficiently allocating important life-saving resources, but this administration has done just that.

TrialSite isn’t a political place, and frankly, we don’t care what party is in office. We work to shine the light of truth on biomedical and health-related research in the hopes of empowering patients and their loved ones, doctors and medical professionals involved with research or care, investors whose money makes new therapies possible, and industry sponsors themselves.
But when governments and industries conspire to suppress important information, not only does it become a potential constitutional rights issue, but in the case of a drug that can help treat someone, it becomes an act of war on the people of a nation—with deadly consequences.

In an email to TrialSite, BIRD informed us that the BIRD Twitter account had over 25,000 followers and was removed with no explanation. They discovered that they were blocked at the same time and for no apparent reason. All that occurred the same day that Merck’s competitive drug was announced (costing $700). The BIRD team’s message was, “In the light of this blatant censorship, please make sure you and others follow us on other channels to continue to hear the facts about ivermectin.”

End of quoted material.

Well, TrialSite, that’s nothing compared to the Still Report which was wiped off YouTube with 177,000 subscribers and over 4,000 videos produced over a 16-year period for reporting on a World Health Organization press release that the WHO no longer thought children should be vaccinated against COVID.

But no matter, that went against the White House allowable narrative, and so it was not allowed.

My wife, Beth’s, Twitter account has been banished several times with nearly 100,000 subscribers.

We are glad that TrialSite has finally noticed the blatant politically and economically-motivated censorship, but humbly point out that we have been dealing with it for years.

We are still reporting from just outside the soon-to-be-restored citadel of world freedom. Good day.