Maria Zee at VNN interviews Dr. William Makis regarding remarkable cancer treatments that are producing previously unseen results using repurposed, off patent, antiparasitics like Ivermectin (that won it's discoverers the 2015 Nobel prize in Medicine for it's use curing people of horrific parasitic scourges that killed many millions), and lately Fenbendazole. These are some of the safest drugs ever discovered, with decades of safe dosing evidence behind them. One of my late heroes, Dr. Zev Zelenko, pioneered the treatment protocol for Covid that was so successful it threatened the entire plandemic.
Just as Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine were banned from the arsenal of treatment options for Covid19 - because they are effective, and the EUA (emergency use authorization) is only legally able to be granted by the FDA specifically for diseases that have no other effective treatments available - they are now being banned from being prescribed for cancers because they are only pennies a dose, and when they cure cancer the outrageously expensive and deadly chemo and radiation treatments don't get to make doctors, pharmaceutical companies, and hospitals rich.
Pharmaceutical megacorporations have completely captured regulatory agencies. Top bureaucrats in the CDC receive $M's in royalties on drug patents, and this means that when they authorize those treatments they make themselves rich. These private financial deals are not required to be disclosed by law, and this creates the terrible ability to bribe the bureaucrats in government agencies to push drugs and treatments while the details of the deals remain secret.
"For example, Congress found:
“Members, including the chair of the FDA and CDC advisory committees who make these [vaccine] decisions own stock in drug companies that make the vaccines.”
“Individuals on both advisory committees own patents for vaccines under consideration, or affected by the decisions of the committees.”
“Three out of the five of the members of the FDA’s advisory committee who voted for the rotavirus vaccine had conflicts of interest that were waived.”
“Dr. John Modlin served for 4 years on the CDC advisory committee and became the chair in February 1998. He participated in the FDA’s committee as well. He owns stock in Merck, one of the largest manufacturers of the vaccine, valued at $26,000. He also serves on Merck’s immunization advisory board.”
“Dr. Patricia Ferrieri, during her tenure as chair of the FDA’s advisory committee, owned stock in Merck valued at about $20,000 and was granted a full waiver.”
“Dr. Harry Greenberg, who serves as chair of the FDA committee, owns $120,000 of stock in Aviron, a vaccine manufacturer. He also is a paid member of the board of advisors of Chiron, another vaccine manufacturer, and owns $40,000 of stock.”
Similar bribes paid hospitals up to $500k per patient that died 'of Covid'. Nobody paid the hospitals or FDA bureaucrats if they prescribed off patent drugs that cured them. The mRNA jabs have been proven by thousands of peer reviewed papers to cause thousands of different maladies - all of which are business opportunities for pharmaceutical companies selling drugs and treatments, hospitals marking those drugs and treatments up, and doctors that get kickbacks from the pharmaceutical companies for treating their patients with them. All across the whole medical industrial complex there are financial incentives to get people sick and keep them that way, until they profitably die.
When disease is cured people aren't patients anymore. They don't need prescriptions anymore. They don't enable their doctors to get kickbacks anymore. They don't pay for hospital beds, or to use expensive equipment like CT scan, MRI, or ultrasound machines anymore. Curing diseases is bad for business. Treating disease, especially terminal disease like cancer, is highly profitable. Like extortion, because patients either pay whatever they're charged for treatments they can't get anywhere else or they die, it's all offers they can't refuse.
Because of this I don't think the mRNA bioweapons are designed to flat out kill people, but to give them terminal diseases that are very expensive to treat before killing them, like turbocancer. Joe Rogan just interviewed Mel Gibson, where the famously forthright actor shared that three of his friends had recently used these antiparasitics to cure their stage 4 cancers. Tragically, while Mel and Joe were filming that interview, Mel's beautiful home in LA burned to the ground. It's pretty hard to handwave away the observation that Mel is being attacked for his faith, his forthright speech, and his dedication to the truth by the forces of evil when shit like that happens, but Mel takes it in stride, pointing out it's 'just stuff', even if it's irreplacable stuff, and the important thing is no one got hurt.
That's what he cares about, and what we all really care about most, and the profiteering by pharmaceutical companies, hospitals, and doctors that hold our lives and health hostage for immense profits is inhuman. I don't have any affiliate links to post here where you can buy things. I can't make any money off Fenbendazole, Ivermectin, or Hydroxychloroquine, and that's why I'm not providing links where you can buy those things, now so you can keep yourself healthy now, or in the event you fall ill later. There's folks out there that can provide those essential products to you only a search away, and I'll leave the money making part of things to them, because I don't care about money.
I care about people, and I want to share this information with people so they can live healthy and happy lives, even when bad things happen. I hope you never need to know these things, but some of us will, and now you know them.
I can’t wait until we can start synthesizing these things in our homes! I know some of it is probably possible but the technology is becoming increasingly decentralized that we could theoretically have our own pharmacy for pretty inexpensive money, doing what we need!
You're not wrong. Here's a discussion and demonstration of 3D printed home drug synthesis labs you might find as interesting as I did. What isn't provided with such a lab is the education about diagnosing and prescribing, dosing, drug interactions, and all the huge volumes of information that come with professional careers in medicine, pharmacy, nursing, and more. It's because of the complexity of the human library of knowledge and the incapacity of any one of us to specialize in everything that I pin so much hope on AI. Not the big, world ruling AI of scifi, but the little AI that is this app or that app, to remind you of when to send birthday cards or change your oil, or how much Ivermectin to take to cure pinworms, vs. how much to take to cure lymphoma.
The chemistry reactor isn't really inexpensive, at least not this first prototype. It's not all that expensive though, either. I am unable to get treatment for an ailment I suffer that costs ~$250k, which is ~$25K per injection and some other equipment. The linked chemistry kit is a LOT cheaper than that!
Thanks!
I found an account of a Dr who claims to be the one who healed Mel Gibsons friends. I'm following him on twitter now and reading up on the studies he shared. Honestly, the stuff is fascinating.
My only fear is that without proper information on the matter people might destroy their health. All treatment has a protocol, and not knowing it is not a good idea.
That's very true. Too little information can be very dangerous when we're talking about dosages of powerful drugs. It is absolutely tragic that the FDA and CDC have opted for banning and censoring drugs and doctors that could provide that information, leaving people to try their best to figure things out if they can't get sound counsel. Too often that just isn't good enough.
Thanks!
Yeah I remember when I used to believe Daddy Gubment would never be this evil, but they totally are. And then I realized it's not even evil it's just delta neutral and completely based on profits. If being "good" was profitable they would all do it. It is not going to be pretty when the mob figures this stuff out, which is why billions are spent in propaganda to prevent just that.
My own perspective would be that disregarding the human cost of profits when human suffering necessarily is concomitant to so profiting, is evil. Hannah Arendt coined the term 'the banality of evil' when discussing bureaucrats just following orders to quantify concentration camp internees, and associated processes, failing to take responsibility for how their work translated into suffering of the internees in WWII.
Indeed.
Thanks!
Edit: rereading your comment I had additional thoughts.
In fact, my understanding of the present evolution of tech is that across all fields of industry today decentralization of the means of production is the cutting edge of tech advance, mandated by the laws of physics, and causing the decentralized production of necessities and the goods and services creating the blessings of civilization to be more productive than centralized production. This then would create an incentive to support development and dispersal of such decentralized means of production because doing so would increase the productivity of civil society in the creation of prosperity across the board, while reducing the concentration of wealth in the current oligarchy parasitizing the lion's share of wealth from centralized production.
This increase in the prosperity of the general population would only temporarily decrease the wealth of the oligarchy, shown by the wealth of even the poor in Western polities today being far beyond that enjoyed by kings and captains of industry only a few decades ago, prior to the electrical grid and attendant industrial development.
Only the weak principle of 'Cash is king' would seem to mitigate against facilitating the development and dispersal of decentralized means of production in a morally neutral actor, while a rational extrapolation of a rising tide of productivity and the benefits of acquaponics alone (that eliminates the need for cropland, monocropping, all the chemical pollution attendant to centralized commercial agriculture through fertilizers, biocides, and preservatives, and the attendant habitat destruction caused by converting natural ecosystems into cropland) would completely surpass the financial benefits of sustaining centralization to extant oligarchs.
This suggests that retaining control and demociding human populations is preferable to oligarchs for other reasons, such as psychopathic enjoyment of power, causing suffering to 'lesser' persons, and etc.
In an environment like this it's pretty easy to make the argument that having a neutral for-profit business model is "evil" because we can see the bad results of such a system. The problem is when one tries to deviate from this model and they realize it's not sustainable or valued by society, making it unsustainable and doomed to fail eventually. The system itself rewards neutrality and pushes the gears of commerce and technology farther, albeit in a toxic way.
Trying to make the argument that "it shouldn't be like this" is invalid when a better replacement system does not exist. They exist in theory but the reality of such "improvements" has shown time and time again to be even worse than what we have. Communism is awesome, in theory. Meritocracy is ideal, in theory. The theory breaks down in reality when we put someone in charge to run it and it immediately becomes a different system akin to any other top-down governance. None of it is scalable beyond a couple hundred people in a community that have relative trust for one another, and sometimes not even then.
For all these reasons and more is why we are all here experimenting with crypto and ways to create rules without rulers... or at least limit the ruler's power significantly. It all starts with not being able to sanction bank accounts, oddly enough. Money talks and bullshit walks I guess.
Dear @valued-customer !
Don't you trust the American medical establishment, the pharmaceutical companies, the doctors? So, you want to make the medicines you need yourself?