Posted on 09/07/2023 5:48:55 AM PDT by MtnClimber
"Here's what never happened in the hospital during COVID:
a doctor sat down next to a patient and said, "You have a choice. We can give you Remdesivir, which killed 53% of the patients in an Ebola trial.
It was so bad the trial had to be shut down.
And you'll notice here in Remdesivir's fact sheet, it says, 'Not a lot of people have used Remdesivir.
Serious and unexpected side effects may happen.'
Or we can give you ivermectin, a safe and effective drug that's been successfully used for decades, and send you home. Which do you prefer?"
"The reason that conversation never happened is that it would have cost the hospital too much money.
If the hospital gave you ivermectin and sent you home, the federal government paid the hospital $3,200.
If the hospital gave you Remdesivir, the federal government paid the entire hospital bill, plus a 20% bonus.
So the hospital executives' choice was to receive $3,200 or $500,000, which was the average hospital bill. No contest.
Patients were going to get Remdesivir — whether they wanted it or not."
"Informed consent died a grotesque death in the hospitals during COVID, and we need an autopsy.
There was no information, and there was no consent, and without them, patients are reduced to helpless victims,
exploited for corrupt financial gain and immoral experiments."
(My Comment): Remdesivir and intubation in the hospital for a covid patient was a deadly 'crap shoot'.
Don’t comply.
Show the studies that prove how dangerous both masks and the $hots being mandated were.
I would still like to have the option of having ivermectin early rather than be told not to try to treat my symptoms. If I didn’t improve with early treatment, then I haven’t lost anything.
I have a problem with doctors who said stay at home until you can’t breathe anymore. Then come on in, and we’ll isolate you until you give up the fight. No comfort of family or friends, just a bunch of strangers who know nothing about you. No one to advocate for the patient. That’s completely immoral.
If I’m on my way out, let me at least have my family with me. Let us at least get to say goodbye in person.
Bkmrk.
Bkmk
The Devil is here, and he is on the loose.
How many people died because of Remdesivir?
Isn't informed consent the law?
Doesn't this make what these people, and the government did, a crime?
(My Comment): Remdesivir and intubation in the hospital for a covid patient was a deadly ‘crap shoot’
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Very good article. The rem/intube wasn’t even a crap shoot, it was a sure fire death warrant.
FamiliarFace wrote: “I would still like to have the option of having ivermectin early rather than be told not to try to treat my symptoms. If I didn’t improve with early treatment, then I haven’t lost anything.”
Fine, but that doesn’t prove the ivermectin was an effective treatment for COVID. I’ve yet to see a ‘gold standard’ evaluation that showed effectiveness.
People weren’t given the chance. I’m not trying to prove anything. Sicko doctors told people to stay at home and do nothing until they were so sick that they went to the ER. Not even told to beef up their immune systems with zinc, quercetin, D3, C, and the like.
The scaremongers made healthy people stop living their lives. I don’t think that saved one soul.
And how do you justify not letting patients have an advocate? No, just go to the hospital to die alone, among a sea of strangers.
There’s a part of me that wishes a special hell-like death to hospital administrators who made those decisions.
FamiliarFace wrote: “People weren’t given the chance. I’m not trying to prove anything.”
Instead, you’d rather make claims and allegations that you cannot support.
I know that my brother died all alone because of hospital policies that wouldn’t even let his wife of almost 50 years come to visit him, not even as they knew death was imminent. Not even for a few minutes. She was CoVid negative even after taking care of him for the first ten days of his illness, and was taking care of the CoVid positive son who lived with them at the time. She was fully vaccinated and taking extra care, just as you doctors did.
I don’t need to prove a d@mn thing to you heartless doctors and hospital administrators. You got rich off of people like my brother, all while the families were devastated without being able to say goodbye.
People like you who defend the protocols shoved at the rest of us make me sick. You should be ashamed, but instead want people like me to keep quiet. Well, there will eventually be another to take my place, because the lot of you did this to way more people.
New, a MUST see. Dr. Malone speaking for thousands of doctors.
https://twitter.com/SpartaJustice/status/1698777242808041945
Thanks. It’s disheartening to know that there are only 17,000 doctors and scientists willing to speak up.
Family says they saved dad’s life by sneaking him ivermectin during 200-day hospitalization
Don't be fooled by the charlatan Dugway Duke's posting (#20) -- there were a LOT more than 8 ivermectin studies, there were at least 99, and a meta-analysis of these shows ivermectin to be 62 percent effective (see my link at bottom of this post). That's much more effective than the horrible drugs given by hospitals, such as Remdesivir: "How Greed and Negligence Likely Killed 600,000+ Americans".
https://c19science.info/FDA_Approval_Process.pdf?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
The medical establishment rushed to publish studies critical of ivermectin soon into the epidemic. They skewed the results -- deliberately choosing the very sick to begin using it in some studies, which of course diminished the overall effectiveness. Ivermectin achieves the best results when used early, the earlier the better. Another way to skew the results was using low dosages of ivermectin. And of course, ivermectin HAD to be disparaged for the EUA to be approved -- if the government had favorably recognized alternative-treatment effectiveness (HCQ too), the EUA could not be FDA approved, under law. Billions of dollars were at stake for the sale of C19 "vaccines", let alone their own protocols for other competing treatments (Remdesivir, etc.)
By the way, the Lancet article on early treatment is dated Jan 2021. That may be the Lancet article that was retracted. There was another article from The New England Journal that had a similar fate, also on ivermectin. Both retractions were embarrassing and showed how blatant the medical establishment's politicization of science has become.
A comment on the JAMA article -- the AMA does not speak for or represent all doctors, only about 15 percent of doctors are dues-paying members. They are as mainstream as it gets, part of the revolving-door cycle between corrupt regulators in the FDA/CDC/NHS and the medical establishment.
The charlatan Dugway Duke used to spend all his/her time defending and promoting the "vaccine" but since that argument is all but lost he/she has moved on to attacking ivermectin. I wonder what the real motive is, because almost nobody is still on that bandwagon anymore, either because their critical thinking skills finally kicked in, or they've personally witnessed or experienced the tragic results of being "fully vaccinated".
Here is the 99 study meta-analysis of ivermectin:
https://c19ivm.org/meta.html?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
Great post. I particularly liked this part.
*** Both retractions were embarrassing and showed how blatant the medical establishment’s politicization of science has become.***
That’s what’s been going on in a nutshell, and for a helluva long time. Those of us in the field never wanted to see this happen again. One Galileo jailed for life was enough.
Spot on.
So sorry for your....and, countless others, HEARTLESS AND NEGLECTFUL loss.
++ 👍🏼
No doubt a less-deadly side effect of multiple doses of the “vaccines” in a feeble attempt to calm irrational fear of the Fauci Flu.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.