“The drug that cracked COVID.”

The statement

“If you were to say, tell me the characteristics of a perfect drug to treat COVID-19, what would you ask for? I think you would ask firstly for something that’s safe, that’s cheap, that’s readily available, and has anti-viral and anti-inflammatory properties. People would say, “That’s ridiculous. There could not possibly be a drug that has all of those characteristics. That’s just unreasonable. But we do have such a drug. The drug is called Ivermectin.”

(Professor Paul Marik, Eastern Virginia Medical School)


The source


“Capuzzo, a six-time Pulitzer-nominated journalist best known for his New York Times-bestselling nonfiction books Close to Shore and Murder Room, ended up publishing his article on ivermectin in Mountain Home, a monthly local magazine for the of the Pennsylvania mountains and New York Finger Lakes region, of which Capuzzo’s wife is the editor. It’s also the reason why I decided to dedicate today’s post to Capuzzo’s article. Put simply, as many people as possible –particularly journalists — need to read his story.” (Nick Corbishley, https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2021/05/i-dont-know-of-a-bigger-story-in-the-world-right-now-than-ivermectin-ny-times-best-selling-author.html )


My take on it

This is a story of hope, beautifully told.  It waits on a happy ending.

It is also a savage indictment of many, particularly amongst politicians, biocrats, big pharma and the media, who have had an exceptional opportunity to make a real difference, and have chosen not to.

God’s word tells us, “Do not withhold good from those to whom it is due, when it is in your power to act.” (Prov 3:27)

This is a flagrant case of withholding good, on an unprecedented scale, from those to whom it is due.

So the question naturally arises, as to Why?

According to Nick Corbishley there are three possible explanations for health regulators’ refusal to allow the use of a highly promising, well-tolerated off-label medicine such as ivermectin:

  • As a generic, ivermectin is cheap and widely available, which means there would be a lot less money to be made by Big Pharma if it became the go-to early-stage treatment against covid.
  • Other pharmaceutical companies are developing their own novel treatments for Covid-19 which would have to compete directly with ivermectin. They include ivermectin’s original manufacturer, Merck, which has an antiviral compound, molnupiravir, in Phase 3 clinical trials for COVID-19. That might explain the company’s recent statement claiming that there is “no scientific basis whatsoever for a potential therapeutic effect of ivermectin against COVID-19. 
  • If approved as a covid-19 treatment, ivermectin could even threaten the emergency use authorisation granted to covid-19 vaccines. One of the basic conditions for the emergency use authorisation granted to the vaccines currently being used against covid is that there are no alternative treatments available for the disease. As such, if ivermectin or some other promising medicine such as fluvoxamine were approved as an effective early treatment for Covid-19, the vaccines could be stripped of authorisation.

.Well, Nick, let’s just say That’s a start.



Covid: “Natural immunity is way better”

The statement

“Every scientist in the world knows that natural immunity is way better than vaccine immunity.”


The source

Dr Peter McCullough, world leading cardiologist who testified last year in a Senate hearing to defend ‘alternative’ covid treatments HCQ and Ivermectin (which have been PROVEN to work, forcing many retractions including from the Lancet and the American Medical Association, most notably). Quoted by Martin Geddes on Telegram, 26 May 2021


My take on it

We must allow Dr McCullough some poetic licence. I don’t know that every scientist in the world agrees about anything.

That said, this core truth needs to be shouted from the rooftops – that natural immunity is effective, safe, and free. Vaccination is none of those things.

And those who really know this field of scientific endeavour, know that to be true.

For which reason, our innate immune system is to be revere, boosted and protected.

The experimental gene therapy (aka ‘the jab’) being promoted by politicians and biocrats as a policy response to Covid-19 is a direct, intentional and probably irreversible assault on that priceless asset.

Target Unmasked: ‘The revolution has begun.’

The statement

‘As the American colonists suffered under British tyranny for many years before the breaking point at Concord, so have American citizens today suffered at the hands of their own government. They, like their forefathers, have demonstrated incredible patience even as that patience has work thin.

Americans are patient no longer. They are standing up, asserting their rights, pushing back, and making clear they will no longer comply. The oligarchs may have in mind that they can simply continue this tyranny forever with masks, social distancing, and most hideously of all vaccines.

They cannot. The revolution has begun. There may or may not ever be a statue of the woman at Target as there is of the Minuteman in Massachusetts. She is no less significant. Another shot heard round the world has been fired.’

The source

Charles “Sam” Faddis, And Magazine, 19 May 2021

( https://andmagazine.com/talk/2021/05/19/the-shot-heard-round-the-world/ )

My take on it

And Magazine is new to me.  I have become aware of it because of this article, which I came across on Telegram.

The article impressed me, for both its reasoning and its tone.  It chronicles some of the key propositions cited without scientific merit by both government and corporates in support of ineffectual and indeed harmful policy responses to Covid-19. 

Beyond that it testifies to the power of a lone voice, informed of its rights.  Very much in the spirit of Solzhenitsyn’s ‘Live Not by Lies

If you appreciate common sense and common courtesy, and inspiration, you will enjoy the read.

Microwave Illness: Truth or Fiction?

The statement

“There is a surprisingly large and growing group of affected individuals with
this condition. Their condition is not due to any personal fault or inadequacy. They
must no longer be ignored, ridiculed, or rendered invisible or irrelevant. There
must be some means to accommodate their situation and needs, to permit some
place of refuge and grant them a measure of dignity. At minimum, they must be
allowed to live in their own homes–for many, their sole sanctuary– without being
violated and driven out by some new, potentially unknown, and undisclosed
emissions source. They need, and deserve, some place of refuge that does not itself
become yet another place of torment.”

The source

Affidavit of Dr Beatrice Golommb, MD PhD, expert witness in Children’s Health Defence v Federal Communications Commission and United States of America, 15 March 2021

My take on it

Where there’s smoke, ….

Scientific discovery often starts with an isolated case. And then another. Here. But also there. Amidst the anecdotes, and across space, and over time, patterns of cause and effect present themselves. Add enough time, and enough cases, and enough ramifications, and eventually formal studies commend themselves, hopefully unencumbered by conflicts of interest. Professor Golommb testifies to part of that journey.

In this field of endeavour, and from what I have read, it would appear that the commercial deployment of relevant technologies is outrunning the establishment of appropriate safety standards.

If ‘a subset of the population’ is vulnerable to Microwave Illness (aka ‘Electrosensitivity’), if that illness is significantly debilitating, and if EMF radiation is escalating, then that has significant public health policy ramifications. The CHD action serves to direct the attention of responsible government where it is needed.