Tucker still not much less naive than he was around twenty years ago, when he accused David Ray Griffin of being “blasphemous” because David was already saying that the official cospithirry about 11/9 was false. But at least he’s giving Peter Mc a platform here - 45 mins. - to lay out the obvious craziness of the banning of early treatment of symptoms. He also displays - like a complete innocent - all the stuff which he - a ‘leading journalist’ - simply hadn’t heard until Peter mentions them. Our tele-star mediawhores are so laughable that sometimes they’re almost lovable! Still, credit-where-due, at least Tucker is managing to do a smidgeon of good work around the covid-hoax:
I agree with this @RhisiartGwilym , but the one thing it emphasises as well, by its obvious omission, is the crystal clear fear of the elephants in the room: Money, Big Pharma, Gates, Fauci and WEF - not a mention, suggestion or hint. That these parties need to be directly in the frame must be obvious to most thinking observers surely!
Oh indeed, C. It was obvious that both of them were skirting round issues. Peter kept tiptoeing up to the question of why this shit-storm was happening, but could never quite dare to say: There’s something criminal going on!’ Like so many basically orthodox bourgeois, such thoughts are too world-shattering to be dared. The great and the good could get up to such terrible things? Oh surely not!
And as for asking who was behind all this, and what are they up to… Seeing that it’s the people who own Tucker Carlson’s employer, as well as so much else, he’s not going to broach that question; in fact, on this showing he isn’t even aware of it. No-one gets to Carlson’s level of mediaslebbery without knowing what matters they must keep doublethunk out of their awareness, permanently, for career’s sake.
Both the poor buggers caught in their own ‘mind-forg’d manacles’.
I think what you could say is Fuc*** oops Tucker Carlson is a gatekeeper. Gives the appearance of Fox News being really liberal, when in fact they really are part of the cabal @RhisiartGwilym called
Great find Rhis. There’s a lot of important stuff here. It’s well covered in the article below.
FWIW I think Tucker did a great job this time. His incredulity (real or not) was an additional bonus as he kept repeating the main stuff in Columbo style (but with more style). He didn’t know (he says) about the fake Lancet paper on HCQ which led to it being stalled around the world.
Top doc: Feds demonizing COVID-19 treatments in order to promote vaccine
“Something has gone off the rails” in the world’s approach to the novel coronavirus pandemic, with health authorities in the U.S. and abroad suppressing safe, cheap and effective treatments while promoting experimental vaccines that have received only emergency use authorization, contends Dr. Peter McCullough.
McCullough, a renowned cardiologist who testified to the U.S. Senate last fall on COVID-19 treatments, pointed out in a lengthy interview with Tucker Carlson’s Fox Nation show “Tucker Carlson Today”that the National Institutes of Health issued a guideline recommending physicians not treat COVID-19 until a patient needs oxygen.
Advertisement - story continues below
“This document will go down in history as the most nihilistic medical guidance as Americans are suffering,” said McCullough, the vice chief of internal medicine at Baylor University Medical Center in Dallas.
Asked to explain why such guidance would be issued, McCullough said it could be “fear driven,” but it’s not in his “moral DNA” to “let people die with no treatment.”
Around the world, physicians are finding success using treatments such as hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin, but there is no regulatory support in the United States for treating COVID-19 at all, as there would be for any other disease, he said.
McCullough has 600 peer-reviewed publications to his name. Many have appeared in top-tier journals such as the New England Journal of Medicine, Journal of the American Medical Association and The Lancet. He is the president of the Cardiorenal Society of America, the co-editor of Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine and associate editor of the American Journal of Cardiology and Cardiorenal Medicine. He has led monitoring safety boards in major drug trials.
“I have seen things in the last year that I cannot explain as a doctor,” he told Carlson. “Why are other doctors not helping, with a simple [treatment] these patients avoid hospitalization and death?”
Do you agree with Dr. Peter McCullough on this issue?
He noted three cases in which families have had to go to court to force physicians to administer the common antiparasitic drug ivermectin. In each case, the court sided with the family and the patient survived.
See the interview:
Advertisement - story continues below
’We did the work authorities failed to do’
Meanwhile, a new peer-reviewed study published by the American Journal of Therapeutics concludes that ivermectin can end the COVID-19 pandemic. Reviewed by a team that includes three top U.S. government senior scientists, the research finds the drug significantly reduces the risk of contracting COVID-19 when used regularly.
In February, a study published in the U.S. journal Frontiers of Pharmacology found ivermectin reduces COVID-19 infections, hospitalizations and deaths by about 75%. In more than 30 trials around the world, the drug causes “repeated, consistent, large magnitude improvements in clinical outcomes’ at all stages of the disease,” according to the study.
The latest study was led by the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance, or FLCCC, a group of medical and scientific experts who are researching and promoting drugs such as ivermectin and hydroxycloroquine as an effective prophylaxis and treatment for COVID-19.
Advertisement - story continues below
“We did the work that the medical authorities failed to do, we conducted the most comprehensive review of the available data on ivermectin,” said Pierre Kory, president and chief medical officer of the FLCCC.
“We applied the gold standard to qualify the data reviewed before concluding that ivermectin can end this pandemic.”
Paul E. Marik, founding member of the FLCCC and chief of pulmonary and critical Care Medicine at Eastern Virginia Medical School, noted the drug has been approved for use and has been effective around the world in places such as South Africa, Zimbabwe, Slovakia, the Czech Republic, Mexico and India.
The study shows ivermectin distribution campaigns have led to “rapid population-wide decreases in morbidity and mortality”.
Advertisement - story continues below
“We are calling on regional public health authorities and medical professionals around the world to demand that ivermectin be included in their standard of care right away so we can end this pandemic once and for all,” Marik said.
’A treatable problem’
In the interview with Carlson, McCullough noted ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine have been shown to be safe while vaccines developed in record-time are being distributed under emergency use authorization.
McCullough clarified that he’s not against vaccines, noting the COVID-19 vaccines can complement the treatments he recommends.
Advertisement - story continues below
“But this idea of scrubbing early treatment in favor of keeping the population in fear in order to potentially accept mass vaccination, I think has done a disservice,” he said.
“The pressure to suppress any hope of treatment is extraordinary.”
McCullough said the "great gamble of the COVID vaccine program is “putting all of our eggs in one basket.”
“If we’re going to put out a vaccine, and we’re going to say we’re going to vaccinate the world, we had better be hawks on safety,” he said.
Advertisement - story continues below
Carlson asked McCullough to explain the single-minded focus on the vaccines.
“That question is best asked to those who are not treating people with these drugs,” he said.
“Maybe it’s all driven by fear, but we are not treating something that is a treatable problem early,” he said. “We have protocols for treating everything in America.”
’Something is up’
Advertisement - story continues below
McCullough said that YouTube’s ban of a video in which he presented various treatment options for COVID-19 led to him being invited to testify before the U.S. Senate last November.
At that time, he said there was a groundswell of people who began saying, “Hey something is up, there is an incredible suppression of early treatment in the medical literature.”
Carlson responded: “That is so dark, it’s hard to believe that it’s real. But of all people, you would know.”
The Fox host asked why physicians, public health officials and politicians would try to suppress information about the treatment of a disease they claim they want to prevent.
Advertisement - story continues below
“I testified in the Senate we have seen things we cannot imagine in medicine,” he said.
The Lancet, the eminent British medical journal, for example, published “a fake paper that came from a fake database that implied that hydroxychloroquine hurt people in the hospital.”
The Lancet later retracted the paper, with no apologies, saying they simply could not verify the findings. But the damage had been done.
The paper, McCullough said, influenced Food and Drug Administration staffers who wrote an FDA warning stating hydroxychloroquine causes harm and doctors shouldn’t administer it.
Advertisement - story continues below
Doctors all over the country who were prescribing hydroxychloroquine to help their patients had their licenses threatened, he noted.
’False narrative that you can get the infection twice’
McCullough pointed out that the FDA, because of safety concerns and cost-benefit analysis, excluded people from the vaccine trials who had recovered from COVID-19 and had antibodies, along with pregnant women and women of child-bearing potential.
"That’s a huge group of exclusions, he said. “That’s a giant part of the health care workforce.”
Advertisement - story continues below
McCullough asked: “So if they weren’t eligible for the randomized trials, and the FDA and the sponsors thought maybe there was a problem with safety, or they had no chance of benefit, and only a small chance of these safety events exclude them, why would they electively go into an investigational program now?”
He insisted it’s a “false narrative that you can get the infection twice.”
After 17 years, people who had the first SARS virus are still immune, and that virus is about 80% the same as the current SARS virus. And of the 111 million people in the world believed to have had COVID-19, there have been only about 100 cases of claimed reinfection.
But in nearly every case of claimed reinfection, McCullough said, it’s turned out to be a misintrepretation of a PCR test, which commonly delivers false positives.
Advertisement - story continues below
“They know you can’t get it again,” he said of authorities. “They’re not going to have [the previously infected] in a clinical trial and have the clinical trial to go to null.”
McCullough said pregnant women and others excluded from the trials should not get a COVID-19 vaccine.
“We never let anything pathogenic into a woman’s body whose pregnant,” he said.
All of the vaccines produce a viral spike protein that is pathogenic and can cause blood clotting and damage blood vessels, he explained.
Advertisement - story continues below
Further, there is no information on safety and efficacy for those excluded groups.
McCullough reacted to calls for mandatory vaccination.
He noted the FDA and CDC state that the vaccines are voluntary, advising people to consult with their physicians.
But many universities and colleges are requiring vaccination for students returning in the fall.
Advertisement - story continues below
McCullough said “letters are coming in from concerned parents all over,” and the first thing he encourages is getting a copy of the policy and the exemptions.
Some institutions haven’t even written a policy yet, he noted.
Significantly, McCullough emphasized that people have been vaccinated historically to protect the individual, not to protect another person, “because the individual takes on the risk.”
Carlson interjected that he heard a doctor on CNN, as well as Barack Obama, say people who don’t get vaccinated are selfish, because it’s about protecting society.
Advertisement - story continues below
McCullough explained that that’s not the policy in the middle of an active pandemic.
It’s different in the case of an eradicated disease such as smallpox, he said. But in the middle of an active pandemic, the purpose of vaccination is to protect the vulnerable people who could die of the disease.
Noting the risk the vaccines pose to COVID-recovered people, he said a clinical diagonosis of COVID-19 should be enough to confirm immunity.
“I hope some rational thinking comes down in America to say, Listen, proof of having COVID or proof of being a survivor recovered will be good enough,” he said.
Advertisement - story continues below
“Because, otherwise, this is getting out of control,” referring to the call for so-called “vaccine passports.”
He said that if people who are vaccinated are to get “green passports,” people who have recovered from COVID should get “g0ld ones,” because their immunity is certain, whereas the vaccines are not perfect.
“The COVID-recovered cannot give or receive the infection,” he said. “We’ve got to get to that important conclusion.”
Carlson wondered why that fact isn’t widely known.
Advertisement - story continues below
“There is an overwhelming cloud of fear and false narrative,” McCullough explained.
People say: “Oh, there are studies out of Denmark where there were some ambient antibodies here and people got COVID here. You must be able to get reinfected.”
But those are “little red-herring cases.”
"I said, Look at your nursing homes, is grandma going in the ICU over and over again? No. Does it seem like everybody gets it one time? Yes.
The WNC article above is a good account of the McCullough interview; so is this one also:
Renowned Doctor Says Feds Deliberately Avoiding Affordable COVID-19 Treatment To Promote Experimental Vaccines
A renowned Dallas cardiologist is challenging the federal government’s push for experimental vaccines versus affordable COVID-19 treatment that is already available to many.
Cardiologist Dr. Peter McCullough is challenging the way the U.S. healthcare system is treating COVID-19 patients. The renowned doctor from Baylor University Medical Center in Dallas is questioning why U.S. doctors have failed to come up with an official treatment protocol for COVID-19.
Dr. McCullough said “something has gone off the rails in the world” in the “irregular response” the federal government has towards the global pandemic.
In a recent appearance in “Tucker Carlson Today,” Dr. McCullough clarified that while he has no agenda, he is “deeply concerned” that the federal government’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic has been “in fear, in isolation and despair.”
FOX News reported that the renowned doctor from Dallas wanted to know why the FDA and pharmaceutical companies “strictly excluded” several groups from their clinical trials of the COVID-19 vaccine.
These groups include persons who were suspected to have recovered from COVID-19, persons with antibodies, pregnant women, and women who were capable of reproduction but who could not assure contraception. Dr. McCullough believes that this "huge group of exclusions’’ is a “giant part of the healthcare workforce.”
Dr. McCullough further cast doubt on why these groups were not eligible for randomized trials. He theorized that the FDA and sponsors may have thought there was a safety problem in the COVID-19 vaccines.
Insisting that the COVID-19 response has been “fear driven,” the renowned doctor warned that he does not recommend experimental vaccines to pregnant women because “We have no information on safety…It violates a simple medical practice principle, we don’t use things where we don’t have a signal of benefit or acceptable safety. We don’t do it.”
Dr. McCullough also argued that in other countries, doctors have encountered success in using affordable COVID-19 treatments such as hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin. However, in the U.S. those two drugs have been shunned and rejected as viable COVID-19 treatments in favor of experimental vaccines.
According to WND, Dr. McCullough was one of the several physicians in a Senate testimony who condemned the politicization of hydroxychloroquine, ivermectin, and other affordable COVID-19 treatment. The renowned doctor argued, “I have seen things in the last year that I cannot explain as a doctor. Why are other doctors not helping, with a simple [treatment] these patients avoid hospitalization and death?”
In January, Daily Mail reported how the U.S. journal Frontiers of Pharmacology published a peer-reviewed study on how ivermectin can decrease COVID-19 infections and hospitalizations by up to 75%. Over 30 trials around the world showed ivermectin causes “repeated, consistent, large magnitude improvements in clinical outcomes.”
However, in March, The Scientist reported that the editors at Frontiers in Pharmacology took down the paper, which was written by Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC) members, citing that the article “contained unsubstantiated claims and violated the journal’s editorial policies.” FLCCC condemned the move, saying it was “censorship” and that their paper had passed through several reviews before publishing.
By now, it’s obvious that the explanation that Peter and Tucker daren’t face is clearly the front-runner: Someone is pulling a huge racket. Precise purposes can be speculated, but the glaring inyerface fact of a criminal racket, involving a whole layer of government administrations and regulatory authorities throughout many countries, somehow persuaded to act in concert, is unmistakable.
I still puzzle at what mix of motivations drives so many of the technocrats, pols and mediawhores to get behind it: outright criminality, TDS-driven scam-swallowing delusions, doublethinking self-protection of funding, assets and careers, etc. But some gang of crooks - or competing gangs in a free-for-all - are making this global feck-up happen deliberately. The rapid piling up of a lengthening list of obvious bad decisions, such as Peter outlines, makes this conclusion more and more unavoidable - however horrifyingly calamitous the sheltered bourgeoisie of the Pampered Twenty Percent may find it.
The need for a Nurnberg 2 international tribunal gets ever more pressing. We are witnessing a major global crime being pulled. Decent people, people not transfixed and brain-scrambled by TDS (and by comfortable-bourgeois moral cowardice), everyone who doesn’t buy the scam, needs to be pressing for an international retribution such as N2. If we don’t soon get off our arses and make some such counter-action happen, we’re likely to get swept into the perps’ black hole - and into whatever they intend to try to lay on us all there.
Incidentally, I got the link to this interview from one of the btl commenters on a current Off-G article. They’re a Curate’s Egg of a crew: some outright nutters; some fairly likely 77-Brigade prop-crook traitors; a sprinkling of mediocrities, but a residue of really sharp and dissidently-well-informed contributors.
Incidentally 2: I don’t know if it’s significant, but I’m quite comforted by the very laid-back way JMGreer is reacting to all this. In a very off-hand and rather dismissive way in a recent interview, he said that both he and Sarah had already had the covid-flu and - as he put it - “I’ve had worse colds.” He’s still concentrating on the eternal verities which always occupy him - that and practical prepping for this current lurch-down of the Long Descent - and really not giving the covid crap much attention.
I find that encouraging. John, in his polymathic way, is hugely knowledgeable about the brain-dead alarums and excursions that sweep across human society from time to time; all the ‘sky is falling/end of the world!!!’ upheavals, and he tends to be extra laid back about them, because he’s also up to speed on the way that they all fizzle out, without ever creating TEOTWAWKI, and the life of the planet carries on regardless.
Straws in the wind suggest, at least to my intuition, that this covid panic will go the same way, and - whilst it will leave a trail of destruction behind it - I don’t think that the crooks pushing it are going to get what they hope for. With a bit of luck, what they will get is long prison sentences; those who escape getting lynched…
