The Canary speaks

The canary speaks

Senator Ron Johnson wrote an OP-ED in the Wall Street Journal on February 2.

Below is an excerpt:

"Google’s YouTube has ratcheted up censorship to a new level by removing two videos from a US Senate committee. They were from a December 8 Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs hearing on early treatment of Covid-19. One was a 30-minute summary; the other was the opening statement of critical-care specialist Pierre Kory. 

Dr. Kory is part of a world-renowned group of physicians who developed a groundbreaking use of corticosteroids to treat hospitalized Covid patients. His testimony at a May Senate hearing helped doctors rethink treatment protocols and saved lives. 

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 percent of the 400 did.

Dr. Kory asked the National Institutes of Health to review his group’s manuscript outlining dozens of successful trials and to consider updating its August 27 guidance in which it recommended “against the use of Ivermectin for the treatment of Covid-19, except in a clinical trial.” On December 10, Sen. Rand Paul and I sent a letter to the NIH requesting that it review Dr. Kory’s evidence."

***

Allow me to add my comment and voice to Senator Johnson's. Since the request was made to the NIH, they, to their credit, invited Dr. Andrew Hill, Dr. Pierre Kory, and Dr. Paul Marik to travel to Bethesda and speak to their committee on COVID-19 treatment on January 6. 

As a result, the NIH broke ranks with the FDA. They removed the restriction against Ivermectin instead raising their guidance to "neutral" and according it the same status as polyclonal antibodies. This has paved the way for Ivermectin to become widely used in the pandemic by informed patients and informed physicians. However, censorship now blocks this vital and lifesaving information from reaching the public.

When I wrote my book attempting to help my friend survive his brain cancer and drawing upon my 38 years of experience and knowledge as a practicing physician, it never occurred to me that certain powerful interests would not want my message to reach readers. It never occurred to me that censorship still takes place in the US.

However, with the blatant removal of critical care specialists' Senate testimony, that is exactly what is happening now.

The larger question is "Why?" 

Why should you not be allowed to hear the testimony of scientists who were qualified and invited to speak before the US Senate? Why should cancer patients not be able to read the material in my book, "Surviving Cancer COVID-19 and Disease: The Repurposed Drug Revolution"?

Why do we allow de facto censorship in the US, and what are the potential future effects of such censorship?

You may believe that YouTube is a kind, generous titan that exists to serve humanity, and its goal is make certain that you listen to only the best and clearest scientific evidence. If you feel this type of parental filtering serves your interests, perhaps you would be willing to purchase some ocean front property in Arizona. 

Like me, if you are skeptical, and believe there is a more sinister motive, be alarmed, be vocal, and object to censorship because censorship is merely the canary in the coal mine. If you see them dropping dead all around you, you should take heed.

America needs to awaken and realize that our parental agencies and captains of industry are not behaving in our best interests; instead, they are catering to their own. When the number of preventable US deaths exceeds 200,000, perhaps someone needs to sound the alarm. 

Accordingly, I update the “Kory Count” out of respect for the "needless: lives lost in the pandemic, those lives that could have been saved with the early outpatient treatment discussed by Dr. Pierre Kory in his Senate testimony that YouTube has now banned.

Dr. Pierre Kory, Dr. Peter McCullough, Dr. Harvey Risch, Dr. George Fareed, Dr. Jean-Jacques Rajter, and other visionaries all testified before Senator Ron Johnson's Homeland Security Committee, and their message must be amplified, not censored. With early outpatient treatment, we can save up to one hundred thousand lives per month, beginning immediately. Such early outpatient treatment, starting with adding Ivermectin both for prevention and treatment, will save countless precious lives, and they may be you, your family or loved ones.

Tell everyone you know about the canaries in our coal mine. Most importantly, inform those who run the mine that something needs to be done before it is too late. Bring a stop to the escalating Kory Count. 

The Beginning Kory Count: November 19 through January 15: 170,809

Current Kory Count of Preventable COVID-19 Deaths Through February 1:

190,893

Signed,

Justus R. Hope, M.D.

(2) comments

GaryLK

it is becoming clearer the NIH has conflicts of interest with Gilead.

They know Ivermectin works against Covid and they mislead the public and it costs 3000 needless, deaths per day.

Faci is the one guy that could change this fast but he didn't even recommend vit D

This is looking very EVIL keeping the pandemic going for profits

And who is advixing youtube and Facebook to censor Dr Kory and Ivermectin?That new youtube video The Ivermectin Story is great exposing the role of Gilead in the NIH through grants to individual doctors,

Repurposed.Drugs.for.All

It is not just Gilead.

Please look at Merck's recent purchase of MK-7110, a novel experimental drug now in Phase III FDA trials that is expected soon to receive (FDA) approval for use in COVID-19. The kicker is that the US government contributed 356 million to Merck to work in a joint agreement (between the US and Merck) to manufacture and distribute the drug once it is approved - which is a virtual certainty. After Merck made these deals, they conveniently came out against their own drug, Ivermectin, now off patent and unprofitable. If the judge to a contest has paid one of the contestants, what do you suppose the chances are that another contestant will win?

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.