O:H header
As if it were a replay of the fiasco that went on with hydroxychloroquine, the establishment media, social media and governments have been collectively censoring information about a drug shown to be highly effective against Covid-19: Ivermectin.

The studies on the drug are nothing short of astounding - more effective than any drug or intervention previously studied. Yet YouTube felt justified in banning videos of congress testimony about the drug, Twitter has blocked links to a peer-reviewed medical journal that had the audacity to publish a study on the drug and the corporate media have been full of articles about the 'dangers' of this drug - despite the fact that it's been approved by the FDA (unlike Covid vaccines) and has been used safely for the last 5 decades.

Join us on this episode of Objective:Health where we give you the low-down on a truly amazing drug that 'THEY' don't want you to know about: Ivermectin.

For other health-related news and more, you can find us on:

♥Twitter: https://twitter.com/objecthealth
♥Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/objecthealth/
♥Brighteon: https://www.brighteon.com/channel/objectivehealth
♥LBRY: https://lbry.tv/@objectivehealth:f

And you can check out all of our previous shows (pre YouTube) here:


Running Time: 00:31:09

Download: MP3 — 28.5 MB

Here is the transcript:

Elliot: Hello, and welcome to this week's edition of Objective Health. My name is Elliot, I am your host today. In the virtual studio with me, I have Erica, Doug and Damian on the wheels of steel.


Elliot: In today's show we are going to be talking about a drug which has gotten a lot of press attention over the past couple of months. It seems to be picking up traction as more and more doctors are explaining the benefits of this drug. specifically, in regard to Covid-19. This drug is not hydroxychloroquine, we have done a show on that in the past.

It is another drug called Ivermectin. Ivermectin is an antiparasitic. It was developed in the 1970's in Japan and is primarily used in cattle, in sheep. There is research showing that this particular drug is very, very effective not only for treating active Covid-19 infection, but also as a prophylactic agent. Some of the research we will be looking at today indicates that this is something that can not only address Covid-19 infection and improve it massively if someone has it, but it is also excellent for protecting or preventing getting this infection in the first place.

We will also be looking at how, not surprisingly, this drug has been slammed by the conventional medical establishment. There are various powers-that-be which are trying to convince people that this drug is not effective and that it should not be used for Covid-19. What should we start off with today?

Doug: Maybe we could start with the site that you found recently that had the summary of the research?

Elliot: There is one site that I think all of our listeners should check out. It is a particularly good collection of evidence looking at the studies and the data and it has got a lot of great analysis of that data. It's called ivmmeta.com and when you go onto the website there is a section on ivermectin titled Ivermectin is effective for COVID-19: real-time meta analysis of 48 studies. There were also sections on this website looking at vitamin D, vitamin C, zinc, hydroxychloroquine and other drugs and therapies which have also been shown to be effective.

Just to go over what this website tells us from the data that's currently available, 100% of the 48 studies to date report positive effects. The random effects meta analysis for early treatment and pooled effects shows a 79% reduction and prophylactic use - meaning preventative use - shows 89% improvement. Mortality results show 75% lower mortality for all treatment delays and 84% lower for an early treatment.

Immediately, what we see is that of all the studies which have been done on Ivermectin shows that this drug is pretty darn effective for Covid-19. It is an unexpected drug as it is anti-parasitic, but it has been studied quite a bit now and there are several researchers who are studying it even further. I suppose, as we move on over the next couple of months we will probably see many more studies coming out.

It says that "The probability that an ineffective treatment generated results as positive as the 48 studies to date is estimated to be 1 in 70 trillion (p = 0.000000000000004)." That is in response to the conventional medical establishment's position which is that this is an ineffective treatment, that this has not been studied and that there is not enough evidence to show that this is an effective treatment and so it should likely not be used.

It's important to note that many of the doctors who have been using Ivermectin have been using it for a repurposed use. This drug is approved by the FDA, but it is not approved by the FDA for the treatment of Covid-19. What that means is legally doctors can use it but they have to use it based on their own discretion. It has been approved, but not specifically for this use so it is not part of the recommended treatment protocols but it is something that doctors have access to if they do want to use it. In response to the fact that there are many sources which are saying that this is ineffective, I will just repeat that they have found the probability that this drug is ineffective is 1 in 70 trillion. What that means is that this drug is massively effective.

Again, I highly recommend this website, especially if you are analytically-minded and you want to look at the science and you want to look at the data. You can see it fairly clearly and all of the details on how effective this is, when it can be used, what it can be used for and in what doses is published on the website.

On the back of that, considering what we have just seen a 1 in 70 trillion chance that this is ineffective, we should really be asking ourselves the question: why is the FDA warning against using this drug for Covid-19 treatment? There was an article on rappler.com - I am not familiar with this website but it looks like it is based in the Philippines - which was published on March 17th, four days ago from the time of recording this show, and the FDA have come out and said that only animals can take Ivermectin. "It has not been tested as a possible Covid-19 treatment". Right there, that's just patently false.

What they are saying is that they are warning the public against taking animal drugs as "the FDA has only evaluated their safety and efficacy in the particular species for which they are labelled. Using these products in humans can cause serious harm. Animal drugs are often highly concentrated and can be highly toxic to humans"

It would seem as though we have the FDA who are coming out and saying do not use this drug, this is very dangerous, this is not effective, this is for animals. Yet, on the other hand we have 46 published studies showing that this is perhaps one of THE most effective drugs to treat Covid-19. So we've got a little bit of a problem there. The question is: who do we trust? Do we trust the data, or do we trust what the FDA is telling us? What do you think guys?

Erica: I don't think that we should trust the FDA.

Doug: I'd like to point out that it is the Philippine FDA, it's not the American FDA. Nonetheless, the point stands. I think that you are absolutely right, I trust the data more than I trust the American FDA or the Philippine FDA for that matter.

Elliot: Right, it's the Philippine FDA, sorry about that. I conveniently missed that.

Doug: It wasn't super clear in the article.

Elliot: It's getting a lot of bad press in America anyway. It turns out that the social media giants have for some reason been censoring a variety of positive posts on their platforms, Twitter included, which are explaining the potential benefits of this drug. There was an article which was published on SOTT at the start of the year titled Twitter blocks European MEDICAL JOURNAL after it published study on promising ivermectin treatment for Covid-19. The medical journal is peer-reviewed scientific journal, EMJ (The European Journal of Medical and Health Sciences). They posted that the drug had shown benefits, that it was promising, they were sharing their data and it was censored; they took it off Twitter.

Doug: They took the entire journal's website off Twitter, it wasn't just that one study they banned the whole thing. Twitter has decided that nobody is allowed to read that medical journal, or at least not link to it from their website.

Elliot: This is not some conspiracy theory website, this not some alternative website.

Doug: It's a medical journal!

Elliot: It's a peer-reviewed medical journal, it's non-political in its very nature, it's science. Although, science can become political, as we know. This was simply posting data on a drug for a viral infection, for God's sake guys! It seems that Twitter did not like that which is not surprising because it is one of the giants which falls in line and does whatever it's told by its masters.

We see that YouTube has also done the same, surprise, surprise. This was in February, a month later. It was an article titled YouTube removes U.S. Senate committee hearing videos discussing ivermectin as early COVID-19 treatment. This was at the US Senate committee! This is not a bunch of fringe doctors sitting around discussing things, this is very important information that should ideally be publicly available. This was on December 18th, it says that "They were from a Dec. 18 Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs hearing on early treatment of Covid-19." There was a doctor named Dr. Kory who is "part of a world-renowned group of physicians who developed a groundbreaking protocol to treat hospitalized Covid patients.

At the December hearing, he presented evidence regarding the use of Ivermectin, a cheap and widely available drug that treats tropical diseases caused by parasites, for prevention and early treatment of Covid-19. He described a just-published study from Argentina in which about 800 health-care workers received Ivermectin and 400 didn't. Not one of the 800 contracted Covid-19; 58% of the 400 who did not receive the medication did."

Basically, all of the 800 people who had this drug did not get the virus. 58% of the people who did not have the drug got the virus. That's in line with some of the other data which is available. It's massively effective for the prevention of Covid and it's massively effective for the treatment of it as well. The author of this one particular article says that,
"The censors at YouTube have decided for all of us that the American public shouldn't be able to hear what senators heard. Apparently they are smarter than medical doctors who have devoted their lives to science and use their skills to save lives. They have decided there is only one medical viewpoint allowed, and it is the viewpoint dictated by government agencies."
We see that time and time again. It would seem as though social media is generally not a very good place to get medical advice anyway, overall, especially when it contains any information which conflicts with the conventional narrative or the one specific narrative that they are trying to shove down everyone's throats, which is that vaccines are the only effective treatment against Covid. Even then, they don't really work all that well, but that is what they want us to believe.

So overall, it would seem as though there are a lot of people in positions of power who do not want the information getting out on Ivermectin.

Doug: Exactly. We talked about this briefly on our last show as well. The emergency use authorization which has been granted to the current crop of vaccines that are out there for Covid-19 is dependent on the fact that there is no alternative to the vaccines, that there is no alternative out there, and that no effective treatment exists. That's why they have given emergency use to these vaccines. If an alternative treatment does come out, like Ivermectin maybe, or even HCQ (Hydroxychloroquine) then all of a sudden they don't have any ground to stand on for that emergency use and it will be yanked out. I think that is why we are seeing such resistance to these drugs.

We did a video on the smear campaign that was out there on Hydroxychloroquine. It was unbelievable. I have never seen anything like this before. Smearing of a drug that actually has therapeutic benefits. Everybody and their mother is on Twitter slamming it and talking about how terrible it is and how Trump is going to kill everybody by talking about this drug.

It is stunning to see something like that, and we are seeing the same kind of thing again. Like you were saying. Elliot, censoring the US Senate on YouTube? Is there a precedent for that? They were censoring the President all over the place so I guess there is a precedent for it. But honestly, it's really stunning to see the wheels come in motion to maintain this narrative, this failing narrative as it were.

Erica: I managed to catch it before it was scrubbed from YouTube and one thing about Dr. Kory was that in his introductory paragraph you could tell that he had been pressured for having conflicts of interest. He was very emotionally worked up and said "I'm working with people and I am seeing them die every day. So are other people in the industry."

He was pleading to have Fauci and the NIH actually look at all the previous studies that they had on this. He had to say that he had no conflicts of interest at all several times. You could tell that he was on the defensive, but he was vehement about getting his point across. He was saying "This is something that can really help people and I do not understand why the NIH is so resistant."

Another thing about the video was that when it was taken down it had over eight million views. That's a lot of views for people. I don't sit around and watch Senate testimony, ever. But to have it taken down and makes you realize we can't even see what's going on behind closed doors in the United States when people are trying to get the information out there for people to consider as opposed to the vaccine. I wanted to share that. I definitely people should go and listen to him because you can tell he really genuinely cares about saving people's lives. This is what we have been force fed for a year now. "We want to save people's lives." Well here's somebody who wants to save people's lives, and he is cut off from sharing this information. That's all I want to say.

Elliot: This guy has worked with this drug on the front lines. There is a transcript of the Senate hearing online and you can read it if you want to. In that, he explains that "Ivermectin is highly safe, widely available and low-cost. Its discoverer was awarded a Nobel Prize in medicine and is already included on the WHO's world's lists of essential medicines."

He talks about some of the data which has been found, the same that was published on the ivmmeta.com website which we spoke about before. He concludes,
"These data shows that Ivermectin is effectively a miracle drug against Covid-19. The magnitude of the effect is similar to its Nobel Prize-worthy historical impacts against parasitic disease across many parts of the globe."
This guy, and many other clinicians who use this in clinical practice are very clear that this is one of THE most effective drugs, if not THE most effective drug, against this condition. The problem is that if the world had an effective solution against this viral infection then all of the other measures would not be needed. That includes mask mandates, restrictions on movement, and the government would have much less control over their people. And much less tyranny.

It would also mean that people are going to be much less likely to get the vaccine. If they know that there is a very safe and very effective method of treating this illness with up to 85% (if not more) effectiveness then they would probably go for the drug rather than the vaccine. In fact, we can almost guarantee that a large chunk of the people who are vaccine hesitant and who are already concerned about the fact that this vaccine is already being administered and that it is not tested, and many people who do not really want to be a guinea pig but are still concerned about Covid-19, we can almost guarantee that a large chunk of those people are going to be taking this drug instead.

If we look at it from a vaccine manufacturer's standpoint, I would say that if I was in the business of trying to sell my vaccines then I would want all as much information as possible about Ivermectin suppressed in any way possible. I would not be wanting people to know about the effectiveness of this very cheap drug because I would want to be getting my vaccine out.

There are multiple conflicts of interest here and it is not a surprise in the slightest. The smear campaign that is going on against this is bordering on criminal. It's unfortunate because there are many people who are unfortunately not going to have access to this if it is warranted.

Doug: It's funny just looking at Twitter while doing the research for the show I was putting in the hashtag "Ivermectin" and seeing what was coming up. There is probably as much stuff talking about how good it is as there is stuff slamming it and smearing it. So many people are using these silly talking points, like "It's an animal drug. Please don't take this, it's dangerous. It's for animals."

That's not a scientific perspective by any stretch of the imagination. It has been used on humans for decades. It isn't just an animal drug, just because it DOES get used on animals doesn't make it an animal drug. There are many, many drugs that are used on both animals and humans because in a lot of ways we are very similar. I was shocked at the amount of smearing that there is on social media for it. YouTube is censoring it, Twitter is censoring it, Twitter is censoring medical journals tha are talking about it. I don't know if they are sock puppet accounts or if these are actually real people who firmly believe this. Maybe it's the same kind of thing that we saw with hydroxychloroquine which became a partisan issue. I was quite surprised at that.

Elliot: It would seem as though they feel like they are running out of time. They are taking drastic measures in terms of all of the censorship now. They want to do all that they can to prevent this information from getting out, and do all that they can even if it exposes them for what they really are. It's almost as though they cannot take the risk of having this information reach the wider public because of all of the potential implications of that, which are, frankly, massive since the entire world has been locked down. For the most part, the entire world has been caught up in this craze of Coronavirus. If it was down to a simple drug like Ivermectin which is really easy to make, really cheap, really effective and really safe. Who knows.

Erica: In New York State several family members of critically ill patients had to get court orders to allow Ivermectin treatment which proved to be lifesaving. Imagine in the middle of a pandemic, in a State like New York, having to get a court order to use Ivermectin to save your families' life? You can't make this stuff up.

Doug: It shows the psychopathic nature of these rules. They would rather have everyone locked in their houses and forced to take an experimental vaccine than use a cheap, effective, historically proven-to-be-safe drug for it which has pretty amazing results coming out. They would rather keep you locked down. They would rather keep you having to wear a mask. They would rather keep your kids terrified, right? That's what they want. They don't want to have a cheap and easy "take a pill and don't worry about it" option. They want to have this control, this fear. It's so maddening.

Erica: At this point in the game, like we have been saying for the last year, is this really about a virus? Have we all realized that there is more to the plot than Covid-1984? If anything, it's a confirmation of that.

Doug: Absolutely.

Elliot: Indeed.

Erica: In the US - I'll tell people this - you can actually buy Agramectin. It's Ivermectin for animals. It's $31 from your local feed store.

Doug: Over the counter.

Erica: Even the gentlemen that sold it to us said that you can take this for Covid-19 and you can give it to your pigs and cattle, dogs and cats too. There you have it. If your doctor won't prescribe it you don't need a court order.

Elliot: There are definitely ways to obtain these kinds of things, whether it be from a vet, or from overseas. There are many countries which do sell these kinds of chemicals without the restrictions that you have in somewhere like the US or Canada or Europe. That's not me making any recommendations here. [Laughter]

Erica: No recommendations. [laughter]

Doug: Just information!

Elliot: Where there's a will there's a way, as they say. Looking at a lot of the data and reading some of the papers on this, I am fairly certain that if one of my family members who I thought wouldn't stand a very good chance against Covid if they were to come down with this virus, then this would be 100% the thing that I would go to. I would try with all of my power to make sure that they had access to it.

It's sickening to think that this treatment has been known for a long time now and it's still not being implemented. It shows that the problem is nothing to do with public health. The problem is primarily political. It was never about the virus and it hasn't been for a long time. Unfortunately, it doesn't look as though this particular drug will get the attention that it deserves, but we will see. Anything can happen over the next couple of weeks and months.

Erica: Or even today!

Elliot: Has anything new happened today?

Erica: No, I was just teasing. My joke these days is that my long-term plan is to make it through today because you never know what is going to happen.

Doug: It's true.

Elliot: Indeed. Is there anything that you guys want to add? Anything that we haven't spoken about?

Doug: I think we've covered it.

Elliot: Ivermectin is good! Right?

Doug: The end.

Elliot: The end. Ivermectin is very impressive. Keep an eye out, on Twitter I would imagine, there are various Twitter hashtags. Keep an eye on the news about what comes out about Ivermectin, and if you do come across information which is essentially trying to discredit Ivermectin's effectiveness, remember the website ivmmeta.com.

If you want to see that data then you go there and it lays it out in a very understandable, comprehensive way that even a layman can understand. After reading that and reviewing the literature, you will see that this is not just hearsay, there is a lot of truth to this. People need to know this, share far and wide.

If that is everything, thank you to my co-hosts, thanks Damian, and thanks to all of our listeners. You can "like" and subscribe on BitChute or Lbry. Thanks for tuning in and we will see you next week.