I do not know what ivermectin is or what it does. I could go read up on it, but think I can glean enough without knowing details. It was effective against many things from worms to other parasites to Lyme’s disease to influenza and the common cold. It is the latter two that suggests to me that Anthony Fauci, WHO, FDA, CDC, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation worked behind the scenes to prevent its use and limit its supplies.

There was a reason. I suggest that there is no such thing as “Covid 19,” and the existence of viruses, for anyone who knows how to read and to think properly, can easily be dismissed. The reason why ivermectin was practically outlawed was that it is effective against influenza and colds. I do not know why, but suspect zinc is involved. It is useful, but not important to know these things.

Let’s get to basics. The reason why the public was convinced that there was a virus called Sars-Cov-2 was because of a widely used and encouraged test called “PCR,” or polymerase chain reaction. It is widely used in law enforcement and research to compare strands of DNA to see if they match. Beyond that, during the alleged pandemic, it was used to suggest to people that they carried an infectious virus, and that they were contagious and needed to be quarantined for two weeks. This is the essence of the “pandemic,” the PCR test misused as a diagnostic tool.

Even as a diagnostic tool, PCR was improperly used. The technology behind its real use is magnification of small DNA snippet, called an “amplification”. The testing can be deadly accurate, as I have seen in my own life in seeing an innocent man released from prison, and a guilty man identified even though not imprisoned. But PCR to be accurate needs to be limited in amplifications, that is, a small snippet can only be enlarged to maybe 25 times its original size, that is, to the 25th power. That is a very large number – 16.8 million times the original size of the DNA snippet, allowing it to be viewed with human eyes. Beyond 25 amps, PCR comparison is warped. According to this paper published by Oxford Academic, at 30 amplifications reliability is reduced to 25%, and at 35 amplifications, 3%. Beyond that, the test is not even a test, but a random guess. That has to do with proper use of PCR, and not how the test was abused during the alleged pandemic.

Around the world, as specified by WHO, PCR tests were done using amplifications of 40 or more. This means that all PCR testing done from March 2020 forward was bogus, and the results were merely random guesses. “Testing positive” was just bad luck.

Enter ivermectin. Since there was no Covid-19, and no virus (never properly isolated anyway), medical personnel were using it to treat symptoms that were probably mere head colds or perhaps flu and pneumonia, themselves deadly killers of old people. It is well established that whatever the causes of these diseases, ivermectin was effectively treating them. In Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s book The Real Anthony Fauci, he details on page 41 and on other pages that ivermectin was anywhere from 54-99% effective in relieving symptoms of what the author calls “Covid-19”, that is, people who test positive using PCR but have ordinary diseases.

This created a problem for Fauci, et al, as they meant for the bogus pandemic to last until December of 2021, at which point vaccines, years in development, would be introduced as a novel and new response to the fake virus. They could not have people testing positive and then recovering. The true objective of the supposed pandemic was to inject people with vaccine poisons with unstated real purposes, rumored to be early death and sterilization.

This in mind, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation sponsored trials of ivermectin (odd as it was well established to be useful and safe) that were designed to fail. Dr. Tess Lawrie, MD, PhD, assessed fifteen trials, all of which (in total) showed that ivermectin reduced “Covid” infections by 86%, and Covid deaths by 62%. Suspiciously, as she was doing her work, WHO researcher Andrew Hill released a meta review to the British Daily Mail that showed similar results as those of Dr. Lawrie, but Hill claimed said results were of “low certainty” and that approval of ivermectin for treatment of Covid would require many months of placebo-based testing. In other words, someone got to him to delay use of the treatment to run out the clock. Below is a transcript of a Zoom based interview of Hill by Dr. Laurie, reprinted in RFK Jr’s book:

WHO researcher Andrew Hill claims to Dr. Lawrie to be in a “very sensitive position…”

Dr. Tess Lawrie, MD, PhD: “lots of people are in sensitive positions; they are in the hospital, in ICUs dying, and they need this medicine.”

Hill: Well,…”

Dr. Lawrie: “This is what I don’t get, you know, because you’re not a clinician. You’re not seeing people dying every day. And this medicine prevents death by 80%. So 80% of those people who are dying today don’t need to die because there is ivermectin.

Hill: “There are a lot, as I said, there are a lot of different opinions about this. As I say, some people simply.…”

Dr. Lawrie: “We are looking at the data; it doesn’t matter what other people say. We are the ones who are … look[ing] at the data and reassuring everybody that this cheap and effective treatment to save lives. It’s clear. You don’t have to say, well, so-and-so says this, and so-and-so says that. It’s absolutely crystal clear. We can save lives today. If we can get the government to buy ivermectin.”

Hill: “Well, I don’t think it’s as simple as that, because you got trials.…”

Dr. Lawrie: “It is as simple as that. We don’t have to wait for studies… We have enough evidence now this shows that ivermectin saves lives, it prevents hospitalization. It saves the clinical staff going to work every day, [and] being exposed. And frankly, I’m shocked at how you are not taking responsibility for that decision. And you still haven’t told me who is [influencing you]? Who is giving you that opinion? Because you keep saying you’re in a sensitive position. I appreciate you are in a sensitive position, if you’re being paid for something that you’re being told [to support] a certain narrative… That is a sensitive position. So, then you kind of have to decide, well, do I take this payment? So maybe you need to say, I’m not going to be paid for this. I can see the evidence … Nobody’s being paid for this work.”

The interview goes on for pages 49-52 in the RFK Jr. book, well worth reading if you have access. Hill seems to be a professional weasel-word guy. Dr. Lawrie at the end asks Hill how he sleeps at night.

The bottom line, of course, is that the powerful forces named above wanted ivermectin kept from the public. It was approved only for treatment of infections caused by parasitic worms, and it is indeed effective for that purpose. Supplies were limited. FDA refused to approve its use for Covid 19. Pharmacists, who have no business doing so, refused to fill prescriptions. Somebody got to them.

I knew that Covid was a hoax as early as March of 2020, but did not follow the intrigue employed by people in power to allow potential relief for people suffering infections of various types (called Covid-19) by use of a widely available drug that had been around for decades. It is obvious that the reason was to prevent effective treatment of illnesses (wrongly labeled Covid 19), to advance the fake pandemic. They wanted, needed the pandemic to promote the vaccines. Without Covid, there were no vaccines, and without vaccines, people could not achieve their true objective, still a work in progress (in conjunction with Climate Change), as I see it, depopulation.

I now read (Healthcare workers cry foul on FDA claiming it didn’t prohibit ivermectin for Covid 19) in Epoch Times that FDA is denying any responsibility for limiting access to ivermectin at a time when the plan was to dispense vaccines under emergency use authorization. That’s why they did it, and why they are lying about it now. The pressure on doctors not to prescribe, and on pharmacies (like Kings Soopers, part of Kroger, a massive chain) not to dispense was formidable. FDA took the official position that ivermectin, which had been prescribed billions of times since 1987 for a wide variety of ailments, was only used on horses as a dewormer.

And now we know why. The same people behind the fake pandemic feared a simple remedy for common diseases that were labeled Covid.

I urge anyone suffering colds, flu, any respiratory ailment, to get your hands on ivermectin. It is shown to be effective.

9 thoughts on “Ivermectin

  1. The PCR test, imeo, was not misused, it was weaponized.

    Further, the “tissue swab” very likely was designed to inject illness-causing toxins into the brainwashed imbeciles. Then the “diagnostic” would detect those toxins and flag them as evidence of the b.s. named…..covid.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Thanks Mark for all your diligent research around this COVID hoax. So many in the truth community still fail to see that viruses as a whole are not what we’ve been taught. You initially led me to Lanka, Cowan and germ theory so I am very grateful for this blog.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Reading the comments on ivermectin.com makes me think that they are behind the so called cure too at least by now. Cand they put poison in the vitamins and pills I mean they control ALL sides right? So really what is in this ivermectin that is making people feel better or since Covid is a hoax it’s a placebo and people just think themselves into feeling better?? The pills are kinda expensive.


  4. Why is ivermectin being promoted? Something is not adding up here.

    You have something that is called the flu, or influenza, or a cold, or even covid…. What’s actually going on? Have you contracted a fictitious flu, common cold, or SarsCov2 virus? Since it’s impossible to catch a fictitious virus, then you understand that the symptoms your body is experiencing are an expression of its attempt to overcome and eliminate a toxic load.

    What does an insecticide that is designed to kill parasites have to do with helping your body eliminate toxicity? If you take it, then of course the poison effect it has on your body may well disrupt and/or change the nature of the symptoms you are experiencing, and while changing the feelings you’re having as your body tries to detox might allow you to imagine this change is beneficial, how does that logically compute? Adding toxicity to promote toxic discharge?…and they also refer to it as an anti-viral medication.

    So, I will acknowledge that when considered as an “anti-viral”, ivermectin is a useful part of the story for those promoting the virus-is-real (RFK Jr., et al), and that what we really need are vaccines that are truly safe and effective to protect us from this virus cooked up in Fauci’s Wuhan lab….

    Do the makers of ivermectin know how to spell tablet?


    1. I was aware and somewhat conflicted by the things you are saying concerning the drug. What I took from it however was that it does have an effect on toxicity and for that reason it might be beneficial. Just because disease is not caused by viruses, and rarely by bacteria, does not mean there are no remedies for it.


    2. Mark, at best we don’t really know what Ivermectin is doing in our bodies since obviously it isn’t addressing a virus or parasites (in the West). At worst, as suggested by OregonMatt, it is adding toxicity.

      Chemotherapy is effective against cancer, but no one would describe chemo as anything BUT toxic. Nonetheless many people consider dying to be worse than taking chemo! But now they are telling perfectly healthy people to stock up on Ivermectin and take it prophylactically!

      Even doctors and researchers admit that they don’t know exactly why Ivermectin is effective against such a wide range of illnesses. It’s almost like “take Ivermectin for respiratory illness” or “take HCQ for any kind of illness” is an Omega hypothesis that explains something, everything and nothing. We NEED a look into that black box.

      I’ll admit to being tempted by it since I’ve been sick quite a bit since early 2021 including what most people would call “Long COVID”. But something is off….


      1. I do not suggest that because a remedy is effective, and studies seem to affirm that Ivermectin is effective and has no side effects, that it is performing some remedy not well understood, or as I suggested in the post, zinc. Statements that it is just added toxicity are not supported by evidence. I claim that because it was effective against “Covid-19″and that Covid-19 was merely routine colds, flu, pneumonia, that Ivermectin might be a way of treating the toxicity that causes these ailments. That’s all I wrote above. I do not claim that diseases are caused by viruses, though a few are bacteria based. I am not here to upset that apple cart.


  5. A relative of mine recommends ‘yin chiao’ for colds, and also acupuncture for almost all ailments. Avoid those with ACETAMINOPHEN.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s