Another COVID Lie Falls: FDA Forced to Retract Statements Against Ivermectin for Use Against COVID

Above: Header for comprehensive depository of all known studies on use of Ivermectin to treat COVID, showing “statistically significant improvements” in majority of studies. Source:

A US appeals court has ordered the FDA to retract its public statements and tweets saying that the popular Nobel Prize-winning drug Ivermectin is not effective against COVID and may be dangerous. The order was issued as part of a settlement of a lawsuit brought by doctors, one of whose licence was attacked by the Texas State Medical Board for refusing to halt prescription of Ivermectin in her treatment of her COVID patients.

Dr. Mary Bowden had her hospital privileges revoked at Houston Methodist Hospital in November 2021, after which she gave a press conference maintaining her practice was sound and saving her patients.

On March 22, 2024 Robert F. Kennedy Jr.s’ Children’s Health Defense reported:

“The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) agreed to take down its website and social media posts warning people not to use ivermectin to treat COVID-19 under terms of a settlement reached Thursday in a lawsuit alleging the agency exceeded its authority when it directed health professionals and patients not to use the drug.

Within 21 days, the agency will remove the consumer update, “Why You Should Not Use Ivermectin to Treat or Prevent COVID-19,” which pictures a doctor and a horse. The FDA posted the update on March 5, 2021.

The FDA webpage, still live, states repeatedly that the FDA has not authorized or approved ivermectin for treating COVID-19 and warns the drug can be “unsafe.” The page also includes language warning people not to use ivermectin “intended for livestock.”

The FDA will also delete social media posts from Twitter, LinkedIn, Facebook and Instagram posted in 2021 and 2022 with messages such as “You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Seriously, y’all. Stop it.””

Below: FDA post on Twitter implying that Ivermetin was only for livestock

A compendium of existing scientific literature on the use of Ivermectin for COVID,, has long reported since the start of COVID that when Ivermectin is used:

“Statistically significant lower risk is seen for mortalityventilationICU admissionhospitalizationrecoverycases, and viral clearance. All remain significant for higher quality studies. 61 studies from 55 independent teams in 25 different countries show statistically significant improvements.

Meta analysis using the most serious outcome shows 62% [51‑70%] and 85% [77‑90%] lower risk for early treatment and prophylaxis, with similar results for higher quality studiesprimary outcomespeer-reviewed studies, and for RCTs.

Results are very robust — in worst case exclusion sensitivity analysis 61 of 101 studies must be excluded to avoid finding statistically significant efficacy.”

Despite such “robust” evidence on the positive efficacy of Ivermectin being available, the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) as late as September 2023 asked the question:

“How much were beliefs in misinformation and trust in institutions associated with individuals’ use of non–evidence-based treatments for COVID-19, including ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine?”

Fauci August 29, 2021 on Ivermectin for COVID “Don’t do it” (view at Rumble)

(View at Rumble)

In the summer of 2021, keeping the demonization of Ivermectin on-track, the Rolling Stone published what turned out to be a false story about Oklahoma emergency rooms being backed up with victims of Ivermectin.

Dr. Paul Marik, chief scientific officer of the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC) and former chief of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine at Eastern Virginia Medical School, told Children’s Health Defense:

“The FDA demonized ivermectin, which is a highly effective drug for the early treatment of COVID. The consequences of this, and what has to be clear is that this led directly to the death of millions of people,” Marik said. “So the FDA has blood on its hands.”

Critics of the US government’s announcement and response to COVID, including what Dr. Mary Bowden calls the “war on Ivermectin,” say the government was motivated by the need to ensure that no alternative treatments were available for COVID in order to gain FDA “emergency use authorization” and mass roll-out of the vaccines, including mandates which forced US service members, government employees, college students, and employees from large swaths of the economy to submit to the injections, which are now being called responsible for a large upswing in yearly deaths in the US and worldwide.

Presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who has been called a “conspiracy theorist” since the start of COVID and who has defended the use of Ivermectin, said last year:

“Tony Fauci’s problem is this: there’s a little known federal law that says, ‘You cannot give an emergency use authorization to a vaccine if there is any medication approved for any purpose that is shown effective against the target disease.’ So if Tony Fauci or anybody had admitted that hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin are effective against COVID, it would have been illegal for them to give the emergency use authorization to the vaccines and they could have never gotten them approved,”

Unspoken by RFK Jr. in that statement is the conclusion that the lives of hundreds of thousands or millions of people who might have been saved by doctors like Mary Bowden mattered not a whit to Fauci, only the approval of the COVID vaccines.

But few doctors, although likely aware of Ivermectin’s efficacy since it was widely disseminated in medical circles, were as fearless as Bowden, or as committed to their patients.

Dr. Drew hosts Dr. Mary Bowden and Senator Dr. Rand Paul on medical deception during COVID (view at Rumble)

As time goes on information damning to governments and formerly trusted medical authorities trickles out at a steady rate, always roundly ignored by the major media which is complicit up to its ears in attacking medical dissenters and being part and parcel of the campaign to shame people who fear the shots or for whatever reason have decided not to take, now it is clear for good reason.

In September 2023, University of Ottawa mathematician Professor Denis Rancourt estimated that 17 million people worldwide have been killed by the COVID vaccines, and millions more have suffered life-altering disabilities.

 In October 2022, Pfizer President of International Developed Markets, Janine Small, in a hearing before European Parliament, was asked by member MEP Rob Roos if the Pfizer vaccine was ever tested for the central justification for the social pressure to get vaccinated, “stopping the the spread,” i.e. transmission, of COVID.

 MEP Rob Roos:

“Was the Pfizer Covid vaccine tested on stopping the transmission of the virus before it entered the market?”

Small’s answer was “No.”

MEP Roos went on to blast government mandates for the drugs, calling the authorities “criminal.” Roos said:

“This is scandalous. Millions of people worldwide felt forced to get vaccinated because of the myth that ‘you do it for others.’ Now this turned out to be a cheap lie.”

Below: EU parliament member Rob Roos, October 2022, questioning Pfizer president (view at Rumble)

In March 2023, UK Health Minister Matt Hancock, the UK equivalent of Anthony Fauci, drew fire when leaked WhatsApp messages showed he and other high officials discussing the timing of the deployment of “the new variant” in order to continue scaring “the pants off everyone” and moving relentlessly toward the vaccines. The messages mocked the public for believing the narrative. They read in part:

“We frighten the pants of [sic] everyone with the new strain,” Mr Hancock agreed.

“Yep that’s what will get proper bahviour [sic] change,” Mr Poole said.

“When do we deploy the new variant,” Mr Hancock asked….

“Any idea how many people we locked up in hotels yesterday?”

Mr Hancock replied, “None. But 149 chose to enter the country and are now in Quarantine Hotels due to their own free will!”

“Hilarious,” Mr Case wrote back.

Other “COVID lies” alleged at Doctors 4 COVID Ethics, a site maintained by doctors and scientists, many of whom stand accused in the media of “misinformation,” are:

  1. The infection fatality rate of SARS-CoV-2 is 0.1 – 0.3%, which is not significantly different from some seasonal influenza epidemics.
  2. Based on the peer-reviewed articles, at least 30 to 50% of the population has prior cross-immunity.
  3. SARS-CoV-2 does discriminate. “The lethality of this virus, as is common with respiratory viruses, is 1000X less in young, healthy people than in elderly people with multiple comorbidities.”
  4. Asymptomatic transmission is the “central conceptual deceit” used to “underscore almost every intrusion: masking, mass testing, lockdowns, border restrictions, school closures, even vaccine passports.”
  5. PCR test is “the central operational deceit.” [Another “lie” used during the COVID saga was the use of the PCR test to inflate cases, even though it was prone to many false positives. The New York Times reported in August 2020: “In three sets of testing data that include cycle thresholds, compiled by officials in Massachusetts, New York and Nevada, up to 90 percent of people testing positive carried barely any virus, a review by The Times found.. Most of these people are not likely to be contagious …”]
  6. Neither cloth nor surgical masks prevent respiratory virus transmission.
  7. Lockdown is “epidemiologically irrelevant” and never works. “Only “stay home if you’re sick” works.
  8. “Covid-19 is the most treatable respiratory viral illness ever”. Safe and effective early treatments are available.
  9. Based on the peer-reviewed articles, very few clinically significant reinfections of SARS-Cov-2 have ever been confirmed.
  10. SARS-CoV-2 mutates slowly, and no variant is even close to escaping naturally-acquired immunity. However, there is the possibility that the so-called vaccines prevent the establishment of immune memory, leading to the repeated infections, which would be a form of acquired immune deficiency.
  11. Safety is the top priority in a public health mass intervention, even more than effectiveness. “It was NEVER appropriate to attempt to “end the pandemic” with a novel technology vaccine.”
  12. The four gene-based “vaccines” are toxic. The basic rules of selecting vaccine candidates are: 1) the agent has no inherent biological action (non-toxic); 2) the agent should be the genetically most stable part of the virus; 3) the agent should be most different from human proteins. Spike protein as the vaccine does not fit any of the above criteria.

The document “The COVID Lies” is accompanied by over two pages of footnotes and references, HERE.

Disturbingly, by far the most serious allegation against the medical status quo and the forces which have made the lives of doctors like Mary Bowden living hell for the past three years is that none of this is accidental. Dr. Mike Yeadon, a former Chief Science Officer and VP for Pfizer for 16 years, says the entire package of “lies” has been a program to force vaccines upon the world population which are “intentionally designed to harm people.”

In December of 2023 Dr. Yeadon addressed the UK Parliament at the invitation of MP Andrew Bridgen, a speech was was promptly censored from the official record, below. READ NEXT: Former Pfizer Chief Science Officer Addresses UK Parliament, Says COVID Vaccines “Designed Intentionally to Harm People”

Dr. Mike Yeadon’s Address To UK Parliament 4th December 2023 (view at Rumble) (TRANSCRIPT) (RUMBLE BACK-UP)

Read Next at Corona News:

Former Pfizer Chief Science Officer Addresses UK Parliament, Says COVID Vaccines “Designed Intentionally to Harm People”
The Twelve COVID Lies


You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

Leave a Reply

Powered by WordPress | Designed by: Premium WordPress Themes | Thanks to Themes Gallery, Bromoney and Wordpress Themes