SHOW 87 TRANSCRIPTS
Dr. Paul 0:00
Dr. Paul Welcome to with the wind science revealed. I interview today Dr. Pierre quarry President, Chief Medical Officer for the frontline COVID-19, Critical Care Alliance. This is an important one folks, he shares his personal story and his journey, the key information from the Ron Johnson hearing regarding the COVID vaccines, and then the most important data the world needs to know about what is going on with COVID. Enjoy the show.
Dr. Pol, from the heart. Today, it's about freedom. This is inspired by my co author Jennifer Margulis whether we're discussing the Palestinian situation, the Holocaust apartheid, the vaccine mandates or forced medical care. Freedom is all important. I live in America, land of the free we say. But I want to read the First Amendment. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peacefully to assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances. So, if you care about freedom of speech, if I care about freedom of speech, that's going to apply to everyone, even people whose opinions differ from mine. I may disagree, I may not understand how they could be missing so much. I may feel they're incredibly misinformed, or even brainwashed. But we either stand for freedom for all, or we're gonna lose it. Before COVID, I wouldn't have imagined I wouldn't have thought it possible that we could lose the freedoms that we have here in the United States. But now it's clear, we must stand strong. And we must all stand or we lose all our freedoms.
Welcome back to pure quarry. Two with the wind science revealed it is an honor to have you on our show.
Pierre Kory, MD 2:16
Thank you. I'll say Likewise. Thank you. You know,
Dr. Paul 2:19
we we met briefly at the Wisconsin Vax con where I was speaking and then you joined our panel and about wow, I finally get to meet this man. And then I attended your conference, the Florida FL CCC conference that where you are a main speaker. And so I'm just so in gratitude to you for your courage to speak out. And at great risk to your own career. You are the if I'm not mistaken. You are the president and Chief Medical Officer for the frontline COVID-19. Critical Care Alliance. Correct? Correct. And I have to say, I was reading your standards of care. Oh, you also wrote the book ivermectin, the war on ivermectin, which is so important. But I was reading your standards of care. And I just had to chuckle at your background. Before we even get to the college and medical school part of your story. I was just curious, is there anything in your childhood and your growing up that prepared you for what we've been going through and your ability to have the courage to do what you've done?
Pierre Kory, MD 3:23
So I'm going to say, No, I wouldn't say that there's something specific that prepared me. But you know, what, here's what I know, just we don't know, like, the whole nature nurture thing. We don't know why we are the way we are. Right. I will say maybe I could probably attribute some of my like, kind of character personality to my father and that he was always kind of his views were, you know, he wasn't a guy who kind of went with, you know, the flow. He I think he always tried to question things, he always thought of things a little differently than, you know, whatever the prevailing, you know, opinions were. So that might have had a nearly influence. But really, what I noticed is when I got to medicine, I mean, I would just have these visceral reactions to when I was starting to practice, like I was seeing how people were doing stuff. And I was like, why are we doing it that way? Like I always questioned whatever the orthodoxy the standard of care was, like, I just always felt we could do it better. And, and then another reason why I questioned that is because the stuff the ways in which we were delivering care, I mean, some of it's been, it's like, two decades without really any kind of evolution or improvement. So I was always kind of trying to push the envelope and, and I would say, then you have COVID, right, which is now that's a different situation. COVID totally novel disease in some ways, right? And so, in the beginning was actually kind of freeing, which is like, we got to figure this out. You know, the do that you're gonna wait around for a randomized control trial to tell you what to do is ludicrous. However, Paul, I don't want to finish I'm gonna stop on this point because I think it'd be a good point to discuss. You know, what happened to me was I was the chief of the, the critical care service, I was the director of the main med surg ICU at the University of Wisconsin, one of the biggest, you know, research institutions, academic medical centers in the country. And in that position, when COVID was calming, and when it started to hit the, you know, we were having these briefing calls every day, which I was, like, in charge of, so like, everybody was calling in, like all the intensivists all the residents, all the fellows, the hospitalists, you know, all the frontline doctors and I was the clinical lead. And I was learning different stuff. And here's what I did something really bad, is I started to suggest, Hey, guys, you know, the mortality rates that we're hearing that from my colleagues in New York that landing on ventilators and not coming off this supportive care only nonsense. These patients are under treated as then I'm talking about the hospital phase. I said, Listen, I think we need to hit him with steroids. And I had very good reasons for that. And then we saw clotting, like we've never seen that was promoting anticoagulation. But here's my point, is when I started to do that, I was also promoting IV vitamin C for lung injury, because there's really good data on that. And I ran into some headwinds, Paul, like my chief and my chair, they were getting very concerned that I was in the lead here. And I was proposing wait for it wait for unproven therapies. And literally, so what happened was because this led to my resignation, that's how I lost my first job in the pandemic. It wasn't, wasn't corruption, it was me being a public figure with opinions that counted the narrative. But literally what happened is, they were basically telling they were overruling me, they started to take over the leadership of these calls, and they were just like hammering away, you know, supportive care only follow the guidelines as if there were guidelines. But basically, they didn't want us to try to treat these patients unless we had some multicenter, double blind prospective randomized control trial. And I'm like, well, that's not going to be around for like, you see, that thought process that I was having, I thought it was a rational sound. pragmatic. Empathy was Hippocratic, you know, like, you know, I don't want to hurt these patients. But these guys, I mean, my chief and my chair like, oh, you know, we've tried anticoagulation in ICU for years, and it's never worked and steroids are problematic. And I'm like, have you seen the clotting of these patients? Like, you gotta understand when I was in the ICU, we had dialysis circuits, clotting. Nurses were trying to do a blood, it was clotting, it was like, but it was like, so plain as day like they were crazy. Yeah. And so anyway, long story short, it would happen there is it got so bad, and then the dean of the school moved against me and got the committee that had approved the use of IV vitamin C in this disease, got them to remove it. And when I saw that the entire leadership of the institution was literally countermanding, what I wanted to do and what I was trying to propose. I resigned and I said, you know, it, I say I am morally and ethically troubled that this is how you guys can approach I said, I refuse to be a clinical leader. But the point to your question is like, I don't know the way I think and assess and do it seems like it's, I'm in a distinct minority, like the prevailing the prevailing thoughts on this. I thought it was crazy. But then I'm gonna thinks I'm crazy. Who's crazy, Paul?
Dr. Paul 8:45
It's what what's interesting is medicine is a very militaristic top down. Approach, right? I mean, when we're in medical school and medical students, we listened to the interns and residents and they listened to the fellows who listened to the attendings. You were at the top. Yeah. But what and so they were supposed to listen to you. But they somehow this group thinks that like
Pierre Kory, MD 9:08
you just said, those above me right in that militaristic top down. You know, I think everybody under me was actually a lot of the doctors are kind of cheered for because they're like, Yeah, I want to use steroids. I wanted like, some of them were starting to do stuff, but then they came down over the top on us.
Dr. Paul 9:23
I imagine you were seeing results where it's you. Yeah, I have to let people who are watching know that because not everybody understands an intensivist. And you are at the top of that discipline in the trenches, treating patients intensivists are at the top of the top of medicine, because you deal with the absolute sickest, most complicated patients. So this isn't theory you're talking about you are living that what exactly happened when COVID-19 hit? Yep, yep. And your journey to that Top I when I was reading your standards of care, I just had to travel that's I almost went to Grenada to the university you went to high. That's it. That's a long way to go. Right to get to where you got you, obviously are incredibly intelligent, hardworking. And yeah. Is there anything in that journey that also maybe prepared you for adversity? Imagine you saw something along the way?
Pierre Kory, MD 10:28
Well, I think it was a lot of adversity that I self created my life because if you read that piece was a little bit of a personal kind of history biography. And, you know, I freely admitted that, you know, as, you know, as a college student, I was very immature. I mean, come on, let's just be honest, I like to be social embody. And I really neglected my studies. I mean, I was a smart guy did well on standardized tests. And, you know, I was a mathematics major, I have a degree in mathematics, which is no small feat. And but I just didn't take school seriously, I was much more interested in social connections and skiing. I went to school in Boulder, you know, so it's very hard to like, you know, put your head down and study in Boulder. And so the adversity is that, you know, here I am, leaving college with a 2.6 GPA for a guy who purportedly wanted to be a doctor. And there's no path. There's no easy path. Now, what's interesting about that is just a memory just reminded me. I remember. So I have a huge family in France and lots of uncles and aunts and my uncle who's like a retired four star general in the French military. He got really active in Rotary Club. And I remember when I was visiting him one year, maybe 1015 years ago, he invited me to a rotary club luncheon. And he just wanted me to talk about like, my story. And I talked about how I came to medicine, which is so foreign for France, because here's the difference in America, you can have a second chance, right? So my route, which is I was in the restaurant business in my 20s, went to graduate school to you know, clean up my little academic record was successful in graduate school. And then I decided my only option be a doctor, I had an option to go offshore. And I pursued it, and I went to school at like 29 years old, which is very atypical. If that was in France, you are done. There are no second chances for the professions. I mean, you gotta like do everything right from the beginning. And so that atypical route I had, I think he's very American. And I'm glad that there is a route and so but yeah, I think there was some adversity and I had to be really committed to pursue that. I really, I want to say like, I had a dream, but I decided, I'm going to free this out, I want to go to medical school. That's just what I want to do. And I just kept at it until it happened.
Dr. Paul 12:46
And what made you choose critical care? Oh, that's a
Pierre Kory, MD 12:49
great question. So here's the funny part about that. I went to medical school to become a pediatrician. And I had, I swear it was very Norman Rockwell Ian, I had this very romantic view of like that, you know, those beautiful old you know, paintings where this benevolent kind physician, you know, puts a stethoscope on the child's chest and does house calls, like, I had this very romantic notion of kind of like a family physician and pediatrician. Problem is, when I got there, I did a pediatrics rotation. And I was like, I couldn't stand it. I was it was so just not what I wanted to do. I was in a very busy outpatient practice in Brooklyn and I had a very negative reaction. And then as medical school went on, wait for it. Everybody in my fourth year knew I was going into psychiatry. Literally, I was like, you know, like in fourth year med school said, Hey, what are you going into? What are you going to everybody knew I was going into psychiatry, and then I did a rotation in Manhattan Psychiatric Center, which is essentially like a center for like the criminally insane. You know, some of them got admitted in the 70s for like pushing someone in front of a subway car. And they were they were so densely schizophrenic. What bothered me about that was not the patient's it's I had a very negative reaction to the attendings and the psychiatrists working in this facility. You know, we go into specialties where we're kind of attracted to someone like a mentor, like there's something about it, it's usually because you you develop a close, when I say attraction, obviously, I don't mean, you know, physical or sexual is just, you know, I was the opposite with the psychiatrist. I was like, I can't work with these people. And then so going back to critical care, I ended up going into internal medicine because that seemed the safest and the broadest. I'd find my way there. And then as I was in training, I mean, whenever there were emergency stuff going down in the ICU, the ICU guys and gals, like they came in like, like just, I mean, I was so impressed with them. They knew everything. Ventile leaders had to intubate, like, they just put out, like, they just manage like the most intense emergencies. And I was like, I just thought they were the baddest of the baddest that, you know, they know all of the specialties. They had all of these skills. And I was like, I want to be like those guys. Yeah, I was scared. I was scared. I was scared of ICU. I mean, it's really intimidating.
Dr. Paul 15:22
It's intense. I love my ICU experience. And the only reason I stayed away from as I looked at the lifestyle, you guys weren't hard, long, long hours, you're away from your family a lot. And I was like, Ah, I don't know if I want to pay that high of a price. But thank you for doing that. So let's get back to when COVID hit because as you saw things unfold. Maybe we can put it in this way. I know you spoke at the Senator Ron Johnson hearing. And this was very important, because he's asking the questions sort of unraveling. What happened? Well, well, you lived it. What What would you say are the most important take home points that we should now know, we now we're looking in the retrospective scope? We have a lot of data. What are the most important points, maybe what you shared at that hearing? Or just what you now feel are the most important take homes, starting from when you realize we had this novel thing happening or somewhat novel? Yeah.
Pierre Kory, MD 16:21
Well, that's a big question. Because it's so broad. So let me just answer, like the things that three years in this is not going to be a positive answer. Because it's more of an explanation for what went wrong, as I understand it, is what I've learned is that science, the medical sciences are so rigidly controlled by influences that are not scientific. And I didn't know that. So like the things that I learned, for instance, and this has been well documented for decades in books, many people have talked about this. I didn't know this. But the high impact medical journals are fully captured by the pharmaceutical industry going into COVID. We all you know, we all venerated those journals. I mean, when when a study was published in those journals, that's the best study by the best trial list. And that has the most meaning, right? And so you always put those and put more value on those than anything else. And if you see what happened in COVID, at the high impact medical journal level, I mean, they I believe that an old because I the way, I think of COVID. It's been a massive marketplace for fraud and corruption. I have lived in a country, which is not unlike many other countries. But I've lived in a country now for three years, where I've seen a succession of policies that are non scientific. There's no true rational scientific basis for every single policy from beginning the lock downs, right? I mean, the lock downs, the mask, let's just say that one was undetermined, I actually don't go crazy on the mass stuff, I think, I think the rigidity of like mass mass mass is the only answer was a little crazy without net without sort of looking at the downstream and negative adverse consequences. But I've seen non scientific policies and the biggest crimes, and the catastrophe that was created is that we've lost millions from the suppression of early treatment drugs, and we are losing millions from deaths due to the vaccine around the world. And it's not only the deaths, it's not only the mortality, it's the morbidity, we have a pandemic of those who are injured and or dead. And how did that happen? I think the entire foundation for all of it exists at the high impact medical journal level, because once you have the science to support this stuff published there. And when I say science, that's it's not the science. Those are very corrupted journals, they censored all positive studies of early treatments. They only published studies which purportedly prove that these medicines don't work. And if you saw that with hydroxychloroquine, and then the the relentless, almost uniform, positive publication of papers that supposedly supported vaccines, and the papers just got more and more absurd, and the constant ignoring of the adverse events which are so so basically what I've learned, I've gone back to your question, I mean, for me, the way I just been transformed, like, what I believe three years ago, and what I believe now I look at society completely differently. I'm a little strange from it. I discovered a world that I was living in that I didn't know I was living in Jonestown. I'm saying like, I mean, going back to the hard working ICU like, although I read the papers, and I'm very well read from a kid I was As an avid reader, you know, I do like different topics, I would say the last 15 years of my life thought, Man head down in the ICU, teaching and reading medicine, I was like on a steady diet, I'm like this one's field. And I wasn't paying attention to the wider world. And then what happened is my expertise that I developed in COVID, kind of just put me out into a society that was behaving very strangely, for the stuff that I was trying to do. I was just trying to do the right thing here, I was trying to like, share my insights, share my experiences, share my research on what I knew about how to treat this disease. And the way in which that was received, left me with a lot of questions. You know, so, you know, it's, I don't know if that's the right answer, or if that answers your question. But I think what, here's the, here's the deal, right? Using that metaphor, blue pill to red pill, right, so I am now like this red pilled person, I see society. And I see, I see things that are happening that I never knew was out there, I see forces. I don't want to sound like I'm hallucinating. But now I'm wreck, I can understand the world's behavior because I know who's behind it now. Right. And, and I didn't know that was the case before. And so I think it's really important that we understand that unfortunately, our public health system that's nationally and globally has been unfortunately captured, our federal agencies are captured. And those are pretty strong statements, but they are fully captured by those which have other non scientific objectives. I mean, they they want to sell stuff, they want us to take pills, they want to, I mean, I try to leave it at the pharmaceutical industry level, because when you go higher, then you can go into like, you know, lots of other more ominous stuff. But what I can say confidently is I haven't seen science, you know, guiding what we do. But here's the thing, most of the doctors in the medical system, they still have implicit faith and trust in the institutions of science. So if you're going to still trust that the agencies are doing the best they can, using the best science they can, keeping up with the data, and evolving their guidance accordingly, using their best judgment without conflicts of interest. If you really believe that's how those agencies operate, you're not going to question a lot of stuff, and you're going to think everything is going along just fine. And we're all doing the best we can. And I would, I would argue there's many, the majority of the system still believes that they have faith in the agencies and faith in those journals. And they don't know that they're being lied to. Yeah,
Dr. Paul 22:45
you can't unsee what you've seen, you can't unknow what you know, and that puts you in a in a very strange place, doesn't it?
Pierre Kory, MD 22:52
Does it they put you in also, I don't want to use the word fringe, but it puts you in a minority. Right. And, and one of the best ways that I like to talk about this and Chris Martenson first gave me this kind of construct. But you know, what I found in my COVID journey is I kind of left the system first voluntarily than forcefully. And, you know, because of my expertise on ivermectin, I started to develop this worldwide national and global network of really interesting lay people, researchers, scientists, clinicians, large network of ivermectin researchers, and you know, the things that we know and learn and share in the data that we pull from. And we use many, many different data sources. And we've seen like, when you really look at the data from any number of sources, your conclusions are very different than what the system is. And so I'm in this segment of society where we know things that most of the rest society doesn't mean. So I use the term that's kind of private knowledge, right? That's not common knowledge, the stuff that we know. So like you said, once you see you can't unsee it, but now you're you're in it, you're living in a society where you have possession of really important private knowledge. And I feel morally ethically responsible to try to make that common knowledge because it's really important, because it'll save lives and promote health. But when you're in that minority, and the common knowledge is actually largely fraudulent and full of lies. You then you then I find that I'm at war. I believe this is a war of information and you know, the other side does not like truth, you know, propaganda the number one enemy of propaganda is truth and the best way in which to fight the truth is to fight the truth tellers. You want to take away their credibility, which takes away their voice right because if you can be be made a fringe quack, right wing conspiracy theorist anti Vaxxer all the labels have been thrown at me And then I appeared to everyone uncredible. And the only people listened to me is that group of private knowledge, folks, it's very hard to get into the common knowledge folks to touch to talk to them, to get them to listen.
Dr. Paul 25:15
So you had that top position in an ICU at a major teaching institution? Certainly there were people below you, who respected you. Oh, yeah, of course. Are there still some people in that institution who respect you? Or do they have to all sort of submit to this narrative that they're that they're required to follow that narrative to keep their job?
Pierre Kory, MD 25:38
Wow, you went to the heart of a major issue? So here's how I'll answer I don't, I don't know. We are going to enchance in general. So in my years, in my academic career, I was also at one point, I was like, one of the youngest program director, so I ran, I ran a program, a pulmonary critical care fellowship, so I trained doctors going into my specialty. And so I have years and years of doctors, you know, mentees of mine, I have a lot of colleagues that I was at around the country and taught with my ultrasound experience, you know, I have this huge network of former colleagues and trainees. And in the beginning, when I first came out was public about the use of corticosteroids. In you know, hospital phase disease, I definitely was hearing the support, I had people reaching out to me, and I think they're like, oh, Pierre, and, you know, some of them were like, we should have listened to Pierre. Because remember, for months, in early COVID, nobody in the world was using corticosteroids. And once it was, once became the standard of care overnight, I heard some, I was hearing from all of that network. So your question is, what do they think of me now? I don't know. Because almost nobody reaches out to me anymore. I have a couple of old trainees that were with me from my early career. Couple of them have quietly from the side been like very supportive, like you getting this you getting this right, man, appreciate it. And then they will tell me like, things are starting to change on the inside. They're telling me some of the doctors are really starting to question the stuff. You know, the stuff that we've been questioning from the beginning, like, I think things are changing on the inside, but I don't really know, I do know that my phone doesn't ring and I don't get a lot of emails anymore.
Dr. Paul 27:23
Yeah. So if a really critically ill, let's just say COVID patient happens to end up in that hospital that used to teach in? What's their care, like, these days? It hasn't changed at all in the last two years.
Pierre Kory, MD 27:38
I don't know specifically, but I can pretty much tell you it's it's in the whole country. Here's the other thing that changed from 2020 to now, right. So that error that I was talking about, were like, hey, maybe we should do this, maybe should do that. You know, once I resigned from UW, I became an Emergency Volunteer in New York City, which was getting hammered. So I went back to New York to my old hospital. And I that was really a really challenging time. But I was allowed to use whatever I want to use. Nobody was messing with me. I was using corticosteroids. I was using blood thinners. You know, like, I could use whatever doses I was pulsing people I was doing whatever I could to keep these patients alive. And that was that was early. Now. There's no There's no doctrine like that. And while I'm there sticking rigidly to their evidence based protocols, you talking about remdesivir We still live in a country where you have the infusion of resistant remdesivir to every hospitalized patients arm, you have this anemic dose of dexamethasone that they're using, and they're not using much else that, you know, maybe they're using like Tocilizumab, one of those, you know, cytokine blockers, you know, they'll throw in, but I don't think they're doing anything else. Beyond I haven't heard of anything else beyond that. And there's so many medicines that we now know work so well. So here's my point on that little pause. In my career. I have never ever been told I couldn't use a medicine with maybe one extension IV Tylenol because of its cost in the hospital. It's so absurdly expensive. You know, they've restricted that. So if you ever wanted to give IV Tylenol, you have to call someone for like specific permission, but that was a cost thing. But no one's ever told me like I couldn't use this or that and sepsis like I could, I was using an IV vitamin C based on a lot of data, you know, and I was somewhat unique in doing that very unique. But now, what I found COVID I mean, not only do they restrict, I mean outpatient hospital systems will not let an outpatient doctor prescribe ivermectin, they take it off the formalise in the hospital. So it's like we're in a different world now. Like the way I I'm hearing about what's going on with hospitals. Those are rigid protocols that you must adhere to and must not stray from. And that's not the medicine that I knew or left a medicine to physicians had autonomy, you use your best judgment, risk benefit and alternative analysis, you know, one of the principles, so I have these two guideposts that I would teach my doctors that I was teaching is the two things that I bring to the ICU. If, if what you're doing is working, just keep doing what you're doing, right, which is like, don't change, you know, if the patient is on a positive trajectory, don't don't do anything, you don't have to do CAT scans or new tests or try new therapies, just keep going. Because generally, if someone's on a positive trajectory, they will continue in that way, as long as you keep doing doing, but if what you're doing is not work, you got to change what you're doing. And I was constantly teaching that. And what I hear from so many distressed people around the country family members is, they'll tell me about a family member in a hospital who's clearly deteriorating, you know, 100%, even despite that, dexamethasone, remdesivir, whatever, they're literally deteriorating, and the doctors aren't like, trying to get more aggressive trial, their new medicines, because again, when you're dealing with someone who's like imminently dying, the risk benefit, alternative approaches are much different. But they're not changing according to that clinical situation scenario, because they don't want to, they don't want to depart from the protocol. And that's not a medicine, I want to practice. And that's not a system I want to be and I will never go back, I will never go back.
Dr. Paul 31:25
Is it? Is it true that the hospitals have been incentivized financially, if they have a COVID positive patient, that's more money. If they intubate that's more money, if the patient dies, that's more money.
Pierre Kory, MD 31:36
There are financial incentives screaming from so much if you want to look at how the system behave, you just have to look at as the system is designed, and I mean, right? Well, I can't remember what that adage is, right? Like, a system will get the results for which it's designed for every user. And they will bake legislation. And so yeah, there's an incentive to code people as COVID deaths more money. You give remdesivir, you get a 20 cent 20% Bonus, on the on the entire hospital bill, right for using EUA approved medicines. You know, the ventilator part that's always been there, like, hospitals have always gotten more money for some really hands on event. But there's reasons for that, because the costs of caring for ventilated patient are just so large. But I think there's an even even more added on bonus if you care for ventilated patient with COVID. You know, so there are tons of incentives and they don't lead to good medicine.
Dr. Paul 32:35
No. So would you agree the goal for a loved one is do it ever you possibly can to stay out of the hospital
Pierre Kory, MD 32:44
100% I mean, my dream since and, you know, let me go back to like, you know, when COVID started, and around the time that I resigned my first position, we started to form the FLCC, you know, a couple of people, prominent doctors reached out to Paul Merrick, you know, caught my co founder, and you know, he and I lead the organization. And he's a famous guy. I mean, he's literally the most published intensivist in the history of our field, who's practicing, the guy who has more papers than him actually doesn't see patients. So I consider him the most published practicing intensivist in in our history. And he's very well known for his protocols for sepsis and whatnot. So people reached out to him early on, said, You know, you got to do something here, there's no treatment protocols, there's nothing. And so we got together, reading everything, talking to doctors everywhere, you know, from China to Italy, you know, to different you know, I've all of my old colleagues and friends, we're running ICUs in New York City, and we put together an early prototype that was a hospital protocol. And we got some prominence from that. We didn't have an early treatment protocol until the fall, when we discovered the efficacy of ivermectin. And, you know, my dream since that time is that every family every cupboard in America has an early treatment kit in there. And with a combination of medicines, you treat it early upon first symptoms like you're supposed to do with any viral syndrome. And we would avoid hospitalizations and almost all we wouldn't we wouldn't have this fear we wouldn't have this emergency. I mean, that's that's been my dream is that early treatment is recognized with effective safe drugs. I'm not talking about PAC slowly. That's another corruption and mono pure was even worse corruption.
Dr. Paul 34:36
So the early treatments that the FLCC came up with I remember math plus was the first thing I became aware of. And of course, you continue to evolve what you're offering. How can people so you're like one of the world leaders on ivermectin, maybe you can speak briefly about that. But then, how can people get access to ivermectin for one which is very difficult? In some states, but then also to this kit that you feel like we all should have, because I agree with you. If you are prepared, there may be a another pandemic that comes our way. And maybe you can speak to that as well.
Pierre Kory, MD 35:14
Yeah. So in terms of, shall we have our protocol. And I want to be clear, like, I don't think that's the only protocol that works. I've seen lots of different protocols, they all work. I mean, if you go to this website called C 19 early.com, C, one nine URL, I don't know if you're familiar with it, but it's this phenomenal resource of real time ongoing, comprehensive meta analyses on all sorts of therapeutics for COVID. think there were up to 43 compounds or therapeutics that are effective in different phases of COVID. So you have this whole host of things that work as antivirals and anti inflammatories, right. And whatever combination you choose, you can come up with different protocols. So my answer your question, so if you go to so let me be clear, I have a nonprofit, which is the frontline COVID-19 Critical Care lines, I also have a private practice because I left the system. And I actually went into private practice because I wanted to become expert in the treatment of longhaul COVID and vaccine injury. And we also do treatment kit planning as well as treatment of acute COVID. So it's very COVID specialty practice. So that's Dr. Pierre quarry.com. And so that's one resource. But if you go to the nonprofit, we have a list of practitioners generally, telehealth who do early treatment, and we don't vet them or anything. I think a lot of them kind of follow the FLCC protocol, but with little changes, you know, they might do one thing they might put in an antibiotic like doxycycline and I'm fine with all of it. But I would say that's a good resource to find practitioners who will prescribe an early treatment kit and then how to get ivermectin you know, that war on ivermectin. I mean, they, I wouldn't say they want it. I think they fought it to a stalemate I, it's my belief that people or practitioners who haven't used ivermectin yet won't start. But those of us who know that it works and have been using it the whole time, the pandemic, we're gonna keep going. The only thing that keeps us going is compounding pharmacies. And I will tell you, in general, that ecosystem of pharmacies has been very supportive, because they've always been kind of, you know, a little bit outside the system, you know, supporting nature of paths, and integrative and functional with kind of non, you know, approved therapies that are very effective. And so, I think they've always had like that kind of, almost like underdog or like, you know, different perspective. I don't use retail pharmacies anymore. I just use compounding and I've been working with a couple that have just been so great. So supportive. And so you can get them from compounding pharmacies, I would say the majority will fill for COVID. Retail is closed. I mean, the the agency scared the hell out all the pharmacists and all the doctors, all the health systems have scared the doctors, none of them can prescribe. And so. So that's one resource. And then, not that I'm promoting this, but I mean, many people have been able to buy ivermectin from for instance, India, right. They have a whole industry, have they sell medicines? And I think they've worked very well. So I mean, there are a few resources. And yeah, we won't talk about animal formulations.
Dr. Paul 38:32
And those other resources, are those available in your book or on your website? As far
Pierre Kory, MD 38:38
as the website? Yeah, no, the book doesn't deal with like those kind of specific. It's not about medical guidance. I'm really, the book is, it's not done yet. But yeah, it really goes over the war and ivermectin. And it's also really kind of like a personal and like FLCC history, I'll give you a little insight, like my substack is going to be a lot of my book, but the books can be still quite different, but it's gonna be a little bit less than the sub stacks. But if you've been reading my substack, you'll you already know, tons. But some of the personal history of how we came to be and where we came from is going to be different. But you know, the one thing I want to point out, because I've said this before, because it's really important. You know, after I testified on ivermectin in December of 2020. As you probably know, you know, I was pretty passionate during that testimony, and it went viral. Right. And so became this kind of really interesting thing, right? Suddenly, not and this isn't about ego or fame, but it went viral. And suddenly everybody was talking about ivermectin like there's this doctor. hear you saying that? It works. He's got all these studies. There's nothing out of house and so suddenly, you saw this lot of attention on ivermectin. And, you know, then I had my A comprehensive review paper which just had overwhelming data shown how effective Iver mechanism COVID. And, and I felt like after that testimony went viral our paper compiled all of the evidence to support it. I thought like, it would be warmly received by society and like governments, and people would like, widely recommend and deployed in prevention and treatment. And what happened next, I just couldn't figure out what was going on. Because like I did an interview with the Associated Press within days of that testimony. And it was a hit job. Like they literally 20 minutes to answer every question, provide them tons of data. And they don't even mention that. And they just say ivermectin, is not a miracle drug. And they don't even really talk about it. All they say is that it's the latest hydroxychloroquine. So, so here, I am, like, wait a second, I just interviewed with the Associated Press, one of the oldest and most powerful news agencies in the world. And I'm looking at this article. What is going on? And how could they write this, we actually filed an ethics complaint against the social, this is how naive we were at the time. But my point is this is that that kept happening, you know, then my paper passes peer review at a prominent journal, three rounds of peer review for different scientists, three of them senior scientists in the FDA in the NIH, and the journal won't publish. And then they sat on our paper for so long, I wrote an email one day I said, I suspect scientific misconduct. There's no credible reason why you're not publishing this paper that's been peer reviewed. And then the chief editor basically has a meeting with my editor and says we're retracting the paper, because we found an anonymous third party reviewer who feels your conclusions don't match your results. So now like now, I'm starting to understand that we're up against something big and not very friendly. But what changed my life was in early March of 20 2001, so three months after that testimony, and the hit jobs and the censorship and all these attacks, this researcher from Australia, his name is Professor will you have you heard me tell the story before this guy, Professor William B. Grant, who I think he's around 80. And he's a long time like world expert in vitamin D. And the uses of vitamin D, you know, in prevention of disease, treatment of disease. And it was a two line email. And all it said was Dr. Corey, what they're doing to vitamin D. I mean, to ivermectin they've been doing to vitamin D for decades. And then he included a link to an article, which is called the disinformation playbook. And I'm like, What is this click on the link, and it's this not long article, very simple conceptual article written by the union for concern scientists. It's on their website. It's actually Google. And I read it, and it spells out these five tactics that industries use when science emerges that's inconvenient to their interests. And so and it's called the disinformation playbook, because each tactic is named after a football playing like what is called the Blitz, where they harass researchers. One is called the fake screen. I can't remember the other two, but each play, I'm reading I'm like, wait, doing that, this, doing that. And like it was like a click. Suddenly, I got a title of suddenly the world made sense to me. Like I couldn't figure out who's doing what and why they were doing it. And suddenly, everything that I'd been living through for three months was explained in that little article, every single crazy thing that I saw being done to ivermectin was right in that little article. And, and that's kind of like when not only did things start to make sense, but I understood I was in a war, meaning that there were people that wanted to destroy ivermectin and as a physician, knowing that it's super safe, highly effective, people are dying from a disease around the world. Now, I realized what not my new job, but I was assigned the role that I got to keep going here because as a physician, Paul, what are you going to do there? Say, Oh, this is too much. And I'm gonna keep quiet now and let people die and not know that there's an effective medicine out there no way. And also, we had an organization that was devoted to it. So we knew we had a mission and we're going to do ours, they're going to do theirs and see where we end up. I think we've saved a few people. And that's an understatement. When we are protocols around the world lot of a good portion of the world knows ivermectin is the fact that there are many countries that use it, and not not the United States and pharma. Yep.
Dr. Paul 44:48
So, you've outlined pretty clearly what also became really evident to me, our sick care system, what we like to call health care, but it's really sick care. It's so broken because it's tied in with the journals that aren't publishing the real science. It's all a captured system. I don't think it's fixable, do you?
Pierre Kory, MD 45:13
No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. It's definitely not fixed. But I thought that for a while, well, if we just completely take down NIH, CDC and FDA and restructure it, no, because that's still controlled by corporations, like the government, unfortunately, I've learned is, is literally control the corporations, they have immense amount of power from legislators onwards. So I don't think you can build a system, which is a wash and so much money and think that a positive, you know, patient, primary centered, you know, focus will come out of that system, you're going to see other influences and objectives. So yeah, I like that point. I don't think it's fixable. The other the other notion that we see tossed around and we I don't want to say we give lip service to I just don't know what it's gonna look like we talk about parallel systems. Now. I think we already kind of have one, you know, like, if you, you know, alternative practitioners used to be a four letter word for me, right? That was a good, well trained system doctor, right? You know, and you hear about people using hyperbaric oxygen and all sorts of other things. Like, that's all nonsense, because if it worked, and it made sense, it would be in the journalist, Paul, but he would be doing it, wouldn't we be in the journalists, and they don't teach us that. And we are the white coats, where the smartest we have the most research and most knowledge, if we're not using it, it must not work. What I've found is now that I'm outside of the system, and I have a private practice that is fee based, I'm learning so many different therapeutics and mechanisms that you've never heard about that are wildly effective. And so I'm using what would be termed alternative therapies. Now, they're not alternative. They're completely scientifically sound, therapeutically robust and potent, but you'd never be able to use it on the inside. And so I do believe that, you know, the problem is that I'm fee based, right? I don't, I can't take insurance, right. Not doing what I do, or churches not gonna pay for half the study. So the shame is because I've always worked kind of in the inner city, is that I'm not seeing poor patients. We do see some pro Bono's, but it's unfortunately, it's not a system for all, but at least it's the beginnings of warmth. And I don't I don't know how to build that out for everybody. Yeah,
Dr. Paul 47:31
that is the biggest challenge, because so many of us who have a conscience, who won't turn a blind eye, when we know, we know what's really going on. We want to help everyone. I mean, that's, that's at our core. Yeah. And yet, people are stuck in the insurance model. You can't use insurance for alternative things.
Pierre Kory, MD 47:54
No, and that insurance controls what you can and can't use, and, and even the stuff that you can use, they're pretty stingy about that. Right? Right. Even like auto approved evidence based medicine, they make you go through all these administrative bureaucratic hoops to try to get it for your patients, right. And so as if doctors have all the time in the world to like argue with insurance companies, they make us do that. So, so anyway, I do think, you know, this discussion of like a parallel system. And that's why I gotta say, we are in a good place compared to other countries is that like, we do have a system of compounding pharmacies, for now. You know, we do have the ability to see patients privately in some countries, you can't. And so at least we have some freedoms left and medicine. But, you know, learning some about the history of some of these doctors, like those who know the chronic Lyme is the thing and treat chronic Lyme. They've had a rough time of it. I mean, they've got, you know, some have lost their license. I mean, the system will not let us in peace out here. In the US what I'm really worried about as as we get more success, and or maybe more popular, because, well, I'm sure you hear the say you came to our conference, how many people the lay people there, the first thing they come to when they talked with Dr. Quarry, where can I go for care? I'm terrified of the hospital. I don't want to go back to my doctor, my PCP is pushing this vaccine. I mean, they know how toxic those vaccines are. So would you go to someone who's literally pushing a toxic intervention on you, but now you're going to trust them for their other guidance? The people are terrified. But if you get more popular and their moves more into that space, they're not going to leave us in peace. Right, Paul? They're gonna start coming after us.
Dr. Paul 49:36
And therein lies the problem. How about as we get close to winding down public health, that term used to mean for me Oh, these are the best people who want the best health for our entire population and watching them, not just mismanaged but absolutely it appears to the fact that they're all just spreading misinformation and discernment lying to the public and harming. They're lying and harming us. And yet we've given them so much power that actually, you know, the head of public health in a given state probably has more power, it seems like than the President of the United States. Sure. What do we do with that?
Pierre Kory, MD 50:22
Here's sort of the private knowledge is those of us now understand and can see the system for what it is, which is the way we would look at public health. There's no more Halo or hagiography of like over last century, where you saw really literally public health campaigns that really had the intent of trying to eradicate control disease, promote the health of the population, now, especially in COVID, that they're not interested in public health, it's literally they're using those public agencies as levers to promote a market for their wares. And, and those agents are now working for an industry that has a documented criminal industry, right? well documented criminal industry and the criminal fines and civil fines that they paid for doing things for suppressing adverse event data, the deaths they've caused. I mean, so now you have a criminal industry that's running public health. So how do you solve that? I think you have to start with what I talked about before, is where I started, I had an implicit faith and trust into the institutions of medicine in the beginning, and now I don't, I can see them for what they are. I know, they're not scientific. And I know they're captured. So the best thing for my health, Paul, is to not listen to them, be very skeptical of everything they're doing. Assume that whatever policy admits from there, it's not about your health, it's about something else. And so if we can get that to be a common knowledge, I think that removes the power. I think that removes the power. And it doesn't make us complicit in our own demise. So for instance, that campaign that they whipped up in society to globally vaccinate the world with I'm sorry, but it's the most toxic and lethal medical intervention known to man, the data to support that is overwhelming. It's causing excess mortality throughout the world amongst young people who are working. If you don't know that they're doing that, if you trust them, you're putting yourself in danger by listening to them. And so I hate having to talk such dark concepts, which is literally trying to tell people, you need to temper your faith that these institutions are working for you. Because if you do that, you're going to be led far astray, you're going to be led to five toxic boosters, and a horrific either death and or disability, which is all that I see. So but But then what happens. I don't know what the second step is. But the first is, I want people to know that this is an information war, and they need to know where their sources of good information are. And here, here's my, here's my criteria for a good source of information. You want to listen to someone who first and foremost the most overwhelming quality they must have in order to for you to even have any semblance of faith, they have to be free of conflict, conflicts of interests, which is almost impossible from the system. Because if you're a professor at an academic medical center, you have a conflict of interest, there are things you can't say or do careers over. You can't work for a pharmaceutical company be a CEO of one, which I think is one of the most absurd things that happened. And then suddenly, we have our major newspapers like Borla opens his mouth, and it's a headline, boiler. Thanks this we should get a booster for the fall. And I'm like, since when do we listen to the info? Right? But so you want someone who's conflict of interest free, which is very hard to do. You want them to be expert in their field. You want them to be fully transparent with their data and be willing to debate it and to use a variety of sources of data. And I will say that I will the fifth one is not necessary, but they have to be willing to sacrifice their position to it's unfortunate that you have to do that but I don't think you have to be willing because by definition if you meet those first four Yeah, it's almost like that's an added bonus. But you know, the conflicts of interest with everybody you know, there's a lot of self censoring, you know, pull the you know, What scares me is that, that, you know, cohort I talked about that private knowledge, my network, I think inside the system, there's a not insignificant growing number of doctors who know that they're not they're working in a very fraudulent crop system
Dr. Paul 54:52
who they don't know how to get out, but they also
Pierre Kory, MD 54:55
don't want to get out and they don't. They've seen what happens to people who do try to call that out. I mean, your career is done. You're done. And so
Dr. Paul 55:07
if you're I would add to your list, even though it's not a critical requirement, but humility. Yeah, you bring such a wonderful combination of courage, knowledge, humility, and expertise, that that without all of those things, you're absolutely right. It's, it's hard to even make a dent. I know you're coming up on your deadline, and we need to wrap it up, maybe just give you the final word, what would be be your closing message to the world? You know.
Pierre Kory, MD 55:45
I mean, I would, I would say COVID specific message. This is a treatable disease period, highly treatable, many effective therapies, that would be one I like, I'll go back to that central point, get a treatment kit ready for you, your family, we need to have agency in our lives, I want people to realize that you can't rely on the agencies, you need to gain agency over your own health in life. And that going forward, we need to develop trusted sources from a parallel system without conflicts of interest that can give us good guidance on how to keep ourselves healthy and thriving. And we haven't been healthy. And we haven't thrived in three years, either. Physically, medically, socially, politically. I mean, it's been a really very dark, few years. But my hopes are that we've been through a lot of suffering. Hopefully, a lot of us have undergone growth, intellectual, spiritual, right. And I think, you know, I do think things happen in cycles, and things get better. And I am, I am hopeful that the amount of people can learn the lessons I learned through my three years experience here will grow. And I think that'll make us healthier, we need to have a diet of good information, that sound and then that's well intentioned, I mean, the propaganda and censorship has to let you know, I don't want to end on a negative thing. But the way in which I viewed the last three years is that the world has gone mad, not their fault. It's through this unrelenting propaganda and censorship. And I think if we can view that I think we can neuter it and we can, you know, take away the power of all the destruction that the propaganda and censorship is having. And then we can have real open discussions we can learn from each other, we can debate things we can talk about, you know, vitamin D different, you know, elderberry its use in RSV or flu like we can have, like good conversations about real topics, that means something to us that you know, have an impact on our health, and I hope those conversations gonna happen. I hope society wakes up. I hope the private knowledge that I've gained very uncomfortable again, becomes common knowledge. I think it's healthy. So
Dr. Paul 57:55
fear, anyway. Yeah, hopefully. I'm gonna let you go. You are a blessing to the world. I appreciate you so much.
Pierre Kory, MD 58:03
Great to talk to you. Take care.
Dr. Paul 58:10
I look forward to running together with the wind at our backs, revealing the science that gives clarity in our world that's full of propaganda and misinformation. Visit our website, doctors and science.com Sign up. Donate if you can. Your support makes a difference. And let's make this the weekly show the world has been waiting for. Thanks for watching. I'm Dr. Paul.
Transcribed by https://otter.ai
Comments are closed.