The False Information From the Establishment Medical Articles on Covid

Last Updated on June 5, 2022 by Shaun Snapp

Executive Summary

  • The conventional medical sources have a steady stream of false information on covid.
  • This article performs an analysis of a typical one of these articles.

Introduction

The lies that the medical establishment tells on covid are mind-boggling. We go through an entire article to uncover this false information. This analysis uses the article How Hospitals Treat Covid 19 Patients (August 21) on the Website Healthgrades.

Our References for This Article

If you want to see our references for this article and related Brightwork articles, visit this link.

What Percentage Survive from Hospital?

COVID-19 is the disease caused by the novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2. Symptoms include fever, cough, fatigue, shortness of breath, lack of appetite, loss of taste or smell, and diarrhea. Most people who develop COVID-19 have mild symptoms that can (and should) be managed at home. However, some people with COVID-19 develop serious illnesses and require hospital care. About 25 to 33% of those who are hospitalized need intensive care, but most people who are hospitalized for COVID-19 recover.

Yes, but most who were not hospitalized would also likely have recovered. Covid is not a very deadly virus.

No Know Cure?

Unfortunately, there is no known cure for COVID-19. Scientists and physicians are still searching for effective treatments, but there are some promising therapies currently in use for severely ill COVID-19 patients.

Yes, and as we will see, most of these effective treatments were denigrated by the health establishment.

Hospital Care for Those With The Coronavirus?

A person who is persistently short of breath may need hospital care. Shortness of breath indicates the lungs are not delivering enough oxygen to the rest of the body; without treatment, oxygen levels may fall and cause organ failure.

Yes, but hospitals did not prove very adept at dealing with this. They placed people on ventilators when they probably could have benefited far more from just receiving oxygen. Some people were placed on ventilators because (in the US) Medicare paid $39,000 for every person treated this way.

Supportive Care?

Because there is no cure for COVID-19 at this time, hospital care for coronavirus focuses on what’s called supportive care, or treatment to support the body’s vital organs. Doctors, nurses and others will monitor oxygen levels and provide treatment to maintain a healthy supply of oxygen to the rest of the body. Some patients need only a nasal cannula, a tube that’s placed in the nostrils to deliver oxygen. Other patients require an oxygen mask, which can deliver high concentrations of oxygen.

Supportive care means that hospitals get to charge, but they can’t do much for the patients. It was a significant error to make people think that hospitals had the answer for treating covid. It led to a perverse logic for the lockdown, which was intended to reduce the stress and load on the hospitals, but the hospitals were able to do very little for patients. Some hospitals became overwhelmed because they did not communicate. There were little hospitals could do.

And there is a cure for covid. It’s called one’s natural immune system. However, the medical establishment does not like talking about the innate immune system because they don’t make money from the natural immune system. The only people at risk from covid are those with a fragile immune system, and there are ways to increase one’s immunity. However, again this is not a topic of interest to the medical establishment.

The quote continues…

Hospital staff monitor patients’ vital signs (heart rate, blood pressure, number of breaths per minute) to watch for developing problems. A patient whose heart rate increases as their blood pressure decreases could be experiencing heart trouble; staff will likely run tests and administer IV (intravenous) fluids and medicine to support the heart’s function.

Did this help, or was this just supportive care? And that is an awful lot of money just to be monitored.

The quote continues…

Some patients will be able to eat and drink normally; others are too sick to do so. If needed, hospital staff can deliver nutrition directly into patients’ veins via an IV.

In that case, it makes sense to go to the hospital, but only a tiny percentage of those who went to the hospital fell into this category. But as is par for the course, this article does not want to discuss that only the fragile run into these problems.

Looking for a Coronavirus Cure? Monoclonal Antibodies

Up until November 2020, there were no FDA-approved treatments specifically for COVID-19. Since then, the FDA has authorized monoclonal antibody drugs—bamlanivimab; combination bamlanivimab and etesevimab; and combination casirivimab and imdevimab—that target the virus’s spike protein. Clinical studies show the antibodies can reduce emergency room visits and hospitalizations in patients with mild to moderate COVID-19. Emergency use authorization (EUA) of the antibodies is for patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 who are at high risk for developing severe COVID-19.

This is curious because when Joe Rogan announced that he had used ivermectin and monoclonal antibodies, he was called an anti-science buffoon by the establishment media.

CNN pilloried Joe Rogan for things that the medical establishment did not use. CNN receives significant funding from Big Pharma. The doctor in this segment is also on the Big Pharma payroll. The studies on ivermectin do not match what this pharma shill states in this video segment. I will get into the comparison table further in on the article. Ivermectin has shallow side effects, and this doctor produces explanations of what would happen if you took a megadose — for livestock of ivermectin. This would be like saying, if you drive at 150 miles per hour, you could die. It is not relevant for people that drive the speed limit. 

This is a media outlet that does not take significant inputs from pharma. This outlet cannot even mention that the product was ivermectin as YouTube banned its mention. Months later, Pfizer created a very similar medicine. 

Now, what they once lampooned, the establishment has been accepted. Now they are “part of science,” while when Joe Rogan took them, they were anti-science conspiracy theories that only those supported QAnon would follow.

The quote continues…

Some existing drugs may help hospitalized patients with COVID-19, so doctors are using a variety of treatments. Patients may receive the following drugs:

Antibiotics. COVID-19 is caused by a virus, so antibiotics—which kill bacteria, not viruses—cannot cure the disease.

Wait one second.

When Joe Rogan and others took ivermectin, which is antiviral, the mainstream media stated that only people that were insane would take an antiviral or “horse de-wormer” and that only horses use ivermectin to treat covid.

My how the “worm as turned.” It is also great to have the old videos on YouTube to see how false the establishment claims were when they were made.

The quote continues…

Interestingly, some antibiotics like azithromycin (Zithromax) exhibit antiviral properties. Equally important, some patients with COVID-19 also develop bacteria-caused infections. Treating these infections with antibiotics can ease the overall strain on the body.

Again, antibiotic treatments were NOT supposed to work against viruses. Anyone who said the contrary was anti-science could get their social media to account shut down and be demonetized on YouTube.

So how is it that this became generally accepted? Ohhhh…..now antibiotics help against viruses.

Remdesivir is a Good Drug?

Remdesivir (Veklury), an antiviral drug that can kill SARS-CoV-2 in a petri dish under experimental conditions, was given EUA by the FDA in May and normal FDA approval in October. It is approved for hospitalized patients 12 and older, even if they are not enrolled in clinical trials. A clinical trial of another antiviral drug, EIDD-2801, began in late April 2020.

According to Early19.com, which catalogs the treatments for covid, Remdesivir is one of the worst-performing treatments. It is curious how it is recommended in this article — and also how as it is on patent, it is one of the most expensive treatments on the list, as you can see below.

This is the list of the most effective treatments against covid.

Remdesivir is very low ineffectiveness. It is at the bottom of the list, which is shown in the following screenshot. 

Observation #1: Remdesivir is One of the Most Expensive and Least Effective Treatments for Covid

Remdesivir is one of the least effective treatments for covid. It is less effective than Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), which was widely lampooned by establishment media. However, HCQ is off of patent, so its cost is $1 per treatment. Remdesivir is $3,120 per treatment or 3120x times as expensive. This profit margin is why the FDA or the front end for Big Pharma has approved Remdesivir. It has nothing to do with effectiveness, and it is about profits. Furthermore, HCQ has far more, or 22x as many studies as Remdesivir. However, because of its enormous profitability for pharmaceutical companies is “highly recommended” by medical authorities.

Observation #2: With More Studies, Molnupiravir Drops in Effectiveness

The two screenshots from the C19 Early.com website were taken months apart. Please scroll up to two screenshots and notice that Molnupiravir has fallen in effectiveness.

When Molnupiravir had two studies, its average effectiveness was 89%. However, by the time it had five studies, its effectiveness had dropped to 54%. Molnupiravir is also very expensive at $700 per treatment. Just taking Zinc is close to as effective as Molnupiravir (at 48% effective), and Zinc is close to free. This shows that these treatments are not much more effective than taking vitamin supplements.

Observation #3: The Worst Treatment at C19 Early is Recommended by the Medical Establishment.

It is humorous to look at the bottom of the table or list on the second screenshot above to see that “Con Plasma,” which stands for convalescent plasma, is the worst-rated treatment for covid, worsening the condition of the patient by 1%. Then see the following quote from the establishment medical article.

Convalescent plasma. In 2020, the FDA began allowing doctors to collect “convalescent plasma” from the blood of recovered patients; this plasma was then administered to sick patients via IV infusion. U.S. clinical trials have thus far not provided conclusive evidence that convalescent therapy is more effective than the standard of care for patients with moderate, severe or critical COVID-19. Under its EUA, doctors can administer antibody-rich convalescent plasma to hospitalized patients early in the course of the disease, in an attempt to prevent progression of the disease and the need for mechanical ventilation.

Isn’t that curious?

The most expensive ($5,000) and most invasive treatment, which has been shown to worsen the patient’s condition slightly, is a recommended treatment. Clinical trials appear to demonstrate it worsens the condition of the patients. Why has the FDA given a EUA for this treatment? Do I need to say it? $5,000 per treatment! That is cold hard cash in the pockets of doctors. Now it should be clear what the FDA approves. “Following the science” appears to be really “follow the money.”

How Powerful is Big Pharma?

This comprehensive listing of treatments is far more effective than anything the FDA does. They are not helpful to decision-making. If one were a cynic, one might conclude that only medicines that maximize profits for the pharmaceutical companies seem to be approved by the establishment and that “following the science” means following the profits to the pharmaceutical revenue and stock options for pharma executives. One might also conclude that pharma seems to control the medical industry. The FDA needs to be recaptured by government interests or simply discredited and abandoned.

How About Steroids?

Oxford University found that treating patients on ventilators with the steroid dexamethasone improved outcomes—reducing deaths by up to a third. Dexamethasone—an inexpensive and readily available drug—also reduced the death rate for patients receiving supplemental oxygen (one-fifth fewer deaths), but had no effect on hospitalized patients who did not need either of these therapies.

If this is true, this is the rare use of an inexpensive treatment. But how do these treatments compare against Zinc or ivermectin? Shouldn’t we be trying to find low-cost and low invasive approaches to treating covid? Placing people on ventilators is very expensive and damages typically the patients’ lungs.

Caution About Drugs Not Approved or Authorized by the FDA

Early research from China suggested the malaria drugs, hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and chloroquine (CQ), might be effective in treating COVID-19. In some cases, they seemed to help; in others, there was no positive effect. Early in the pandemic, the FDA granted emergency use authorized (EUA) for HCQ, but later withdrew it because mounting evidence showed the drugs “are unlikely to be effective in treating COVID-19 for the authorized uses in the EUA.” HCQ and CQ have serious side effects, including irregular heart rhythms and death.

Really? Because that is not what the studies at Early19.com show. And all those studies are not from China. As of the publication date on the article, you are reading 297 studies on HCQ — the most studies of any treatment. Why is this author denigrating them by tainting the investigations by saying they were “Chinese.” And it is not just early studies — later studies also show some effectiveness. But HCQ is not very effective. But it’s better than Remdesivir and 3120x less expensive.

As for hydroxychloroquine being for malaria, this follows a pattern of the establishment media to assert that because a drug treats something else, it can’t be effective against covid. Malaria is caused by a protozoa, and anti-bacterial does combat malaria.

Hating on Ivermectin?

The FDA has received reports of people taking ivermectin for COVID-19. This drug is not authorized or approved for use in people for treating COVID-19.

Ivermectin studies show that it is more effective than any vaccine and more effective than drugs that FDA has approved.

The only reason ivermectin has not been approved is only that it is not on a patent.

The quote continues.

It’s most common use in the U.S. is to treat and prevent parasitic worm infections in animals.

This is a moronic sentence as ivermectin has been prescribed to billions of humans.

This is another attempt to make ivermectin seem like humans do not take it. This was part of the smear campaign against Joe Rogan, which was to ignore its human uses as one of the most prescribed medications to humans of all time and to make Joe Rogan seem like he was insane for taking it.

The quote continues…

In humans, ivermectin tablets are approved for treating the parasitic worm infections strongyloidiasis and onchocerciasis; topical forms treat head lice and rosacea.

This is the same tactic of stating ivermectin is used to treat parasites and lice.

Again, what is the relevance of this except to undermine the use of ivermectin for covid? This is a dishonest author. One cannot write such nonsense honestly. Furthermore, anyone can construct such a false equivalency. For example, did you know that the most common use for water is to fill the oceans? Yes, oceans (made up of water) are most commonly used to fill low-lying land between continents and islands. Some water is used in streams and rivers, but why would you want to drink that? The most common use of water is actually for livestock, not humans. The FDA is still investigating whether humans can consume water.

The quote continues…

Ivermectin for horses is not the same as ivermectin for humans. People who have taken ivermectin meant for horses have become very ill. If you have an ivermectin prescription for an FDA-approved use, get it from a reputable source and take it as prescribed. The FDA has not reviewed the data to support the use of ivermectin for COVID-19, but the FDA website states that “initial research is underway.

Who is this helping?

There were just a few people who took livestock ivermectin and probably took the wrong dose. Really, how much different is livestock ivermectin from human ivermectin? But the number of people that did this is a mathematical irrelevancy — yet the establishment media cannot get enough of these stories.

This paragraph is trying to appear like a public service announcement. Still, in reality, it is an insulting condescension to anyone who does not take the ever-changing advice of the medical establishment. Naturally, anyone who disagrees with the pharmaceutical-controlled medical establishment and media must take livestock medications and probably have sex with livestock (naturally) — unlike the enlightened and super scientifically literate liberals. The latter jog outside while wearing a mask.

This is Jimmy Dore’s analysis of John Campbell’s analysis of ivermectin. Ivermectin is likely far more effective than Pfizer’s new drug. But Pfizer (and hence the FDA) still do not want you to take ivermectin.

To Jimmy Dore’s point, he will not rely on pharma-controlled media but get his information from well-informed people on YouTube.

As the accuracy of the medical establishment and pharma controlled media is so low, they have to censor and “fact check” higher quality and lower financially biased sources of information — even if that information comes from medical professionals, as the video above shows.

Intensive Care and Ventilator Treatment?

If a patient’s condition worsens despite supportive hospital care, the patient may be transferred to the intensive care unit (ICU). Patients in the ICU are monitored even more closely than other hospitalized patients; usually, an ICU nurse only cares for 1 to 2 patients per shift. If the patient cannot breathe effectively, doctors may recommend intubation—placing a breathing tube in the patient’s airway—and ventilator treatment. A ventilator forces air and oxygen into the lungs. Critical care providers administer drugs so the patient remains sleepy and comfortable. If the patient’s condition improves, the healthcare team will gradually wean the patient off the ventilator.

PCR Test Versus Tarot Cards

What has not been mentioned in this entire article is that the PCR test used to determine if someone has covid is extremely unreliable, as I cover in the article Understanding How the PCR Test Was Never a Reliable Test for Covid. The PCR test is less reliable than throwing dice or using tarot cards. If the news reported that tarot cards found a significant uptick in covid, would you take that report seriously? The only people to which this would happen are already either quite old or quite overweight or otherwise unhealthy. The only difference is you know tarot cards are fake, but you did not know the PCR test produces enormous false positives.

Anyone of these cards can mean you have covid. Now you have a rough approximation for the accuracy of the PCR test. 

Therefore, the hospital does not know if patients have covid. Every covid case that has been reported has been based upon the PCR test.

Length of Stay in a Hospital Due to Covid?

Hospitalization for coronavirus may be a week or longer. According to the CDC (U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention), the average length of hospitalization for survivors is 10 to 13 days. It is difficult to predict what will happen during coronavirus hospitalization. The healthcare team will do their best to keep you informed at all times.

This is a very long time and very expensive. Furthermore, 94% of those that die in a hospital have comorbidities. This author appears to be deliberately skipping over this point. Covid does not make healthy people sick, and it makes sick people who are immunocompromised sicker. This article makes it sound as if perfectly healthy people go to the hospital and must be treated for covid at the hospital.

Conclusion

This is a highly deceptive article. It does not acknowledge that recently before this article was written, the established media lampooned the treatments listed here. As with other establishment sources, the article does the bidding of pharmaceutical interests by promoting profit-maximizing treatments to pharma. The author ignores treatments that have proven effective, like ivermectin, Zinc, and other treatments that are even more effective than ivermectin. The article uses what the laughingstock and highly corrupt FDA has approved as some gold standard, without pointing out that the FDA approves whatever the drug companies want them to approve. The FDA has no independent from the pharmaceutical industry.

This author may know this, so this author is lying to the reader and covering for the medical establishment. When doctors and, in this case, a nurse write articles, it is impossible to tell in most cases that these medical professionals don’t simply work directly for the pharmaceutical companies. This very rightly should lead to a crisis of confidence in the medical establishment.

Be Notified When Our Upcoming Subscription Website on Ivermectin and Other Medical Treatments is Ready

Ivermectin has many treatment applications outside of its approved use (as an antiparasitical. These treatments include cancer, covid, immunity, and more. And due to perverse financial incentives, many of these applications are hidden from the public.

Due to the many questions we receive on Ivermectin, we are now working on a subscription website that covers everything related to Ivermectin ranging from its many health improvement applications to dosages, and contrasting this with the false information presented on Ivermectin by medical authorities. The site will be ready soon as we are making good progress. We will also be adding questions from subscribers answered as customized articles. 

If you are potentially interested in subscribing, contact us using the text chat widget in the lower right-hand corner of this page and just tell us you are interested in being informed when the website is live.