Dr. Peter McCullough, MD testifies How Successful Home Treatments for COVID Make Experimental Vaccines Unnecessary
by Brian Shilhavy
Editor, Health Impact News
Dr. Peter McCullough is a consultant cardiologist and Vice Chief of Medicine at Baylor University Medical Center in Dallas, TX. He is a Principal Faculty in internal medicine for the Texas A & M University Health Sciences Center.
Dr. McCullough is an internationally recognized authority on the role of chronic kidney disease as a cardiovascular risk state with over 1000 publications and over 500 citations in the National Library of Medicine.
He is the most published scientist in the history of his field.
When the COVID crisis hit, Dr. McCullough began studying the medical literature to find treatments, and began to treat his patients with current drugs “off label,” because his patients who were testing positive for COVID were sent home from the hospitals and told to wait two weeks, with no treatment options.
Dr. McCullough was then the lead author in a study published in the American Journal of Medicine that summarized existing drugs already approved and in the market that had success in treating COVID-19 patients.
At that time, according to Dr. McCullough, there were over 50,000 papers on COVID in the peer-reviewed literature, and none of them dealt with how doctors are supposed to treat COVID.
After publication, it became the most cited study dealing with COVID, and people were contacting Dr. McCullough from all over the world seeking help in treating COVID patients.
He took a few slides from his presentation and decided to publish a YouTube video on it, to help spread the word that there were effective treatments for COVID.
It soon went viral, as could be expected when one of the most respected doctors in the world was presenting effective treatments of COVID, and within about a week YouTube took it down, stating that it violated the terms of their community.
Senator Johnson from Wisconsin then got involved, and arranged for Dr. McCullough and others to give expert testimony in Senate hearings in November of 2020, explaining that people did not have to die from COVID because effective treatments existed.
This life-saving information was being censored in the corporate media, and was being removed by Big Tech in social media.
Dr. McCullough himself is a COVID survivor, and used these treatments personally, and for his family members.
All of this information was explained by Dr. McCullough recently in a Texas Health and Human Services Senate hearing (video below).
Obviously choking back tears and trying to keep his composure, Dr. McCullough explained:
You get handed a diagnostic test. It says, here, you’re COVID positive, go home.
Is there any treatment?
Is there any resources I can call?
Any referral lines, hotlines?
Any research hotlines?
That’s the standard of care in the United States. And if we go to any one of our testing centers today in Texas, I bet that’s the standard of care.
No wonder we have had 45,000 deaths in Texas. The average person in Texas thinks there’s no treatment!
Dr. McCullough goes on to urge HHS in Texas to start listing treatments and treatment centers in Texas where patients can get help, and focus on those sick right now, rather than spend so much time on the vaccines.
I have to tell you, what has gone on has been beyond belief!
How many of you have turned on a local news station, or a national cable news station, and ever gotten an update on treatment at home?
How many of you have ever gotten a single word about what to do when you get handed the diagnosis of COVID-19?
That is a complete and total failure AT EVERY LEVEL!
Let’s take the White House.
How come we didn’t have a panel of doctors assigned to put all their efforts to stop these hospitalizations?
Why don’t we have doctors who actually treated patients get together in a group and every week give us an update?
Why didn’t we have that?
Why didn’t we have that at the state level? ZERO!
Why don’t we have any reports about how many patients were treated, and spared hospitalizations?
We have a complete and total blank spot on treatment. It is a blanking phenomenon.
This is a complete and total travesty to have a fatal disease, and not treat it.
Dr. McCullough then tells legislators in Texas what can be done RIGHT NOW to reverse this (but will they do it??).
CONTINUE to the rest of the article and videos
Posted on January 28, 2021 by ourgreaterdestiny
The following evidence is for distribution in any countryThis resource will be updated as required.
The more people who have access to fact based evidence of a world coup masked as a life threatening flu, and leverage the proof, the sooner chaos transforms into coherence.
1] Freedom of Information ActFOIs reveal that health/science institutions around the world have no record of SARS-COV-2 isolation/purification, anywhere, ever.
Last updated Jan 22.21. https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/fois-reveal-that-health-science-institutions-around-the-world-have-no-record-of-sars-cov-2-isolation-purification/
2] Studies did not fulfill Koch’s postulatesDavid Crowe 1956-2020 former Canadian software and telecommunications engineer with a degree in mathematics and biology, became an independent expert in 21st Century global infections such as SARS, Ebola and flu.
Page 5 Virus Existence https://theinfectiousmyth.com/book/CoronavirusPanic.pdf
Scientists are detecting novel RNA in multiple patients with influenza or pneumonia-like conditions, and are assuming that the detection of RNA (which is believed to be wrapped in proteins to form an RNA virus, as coronaviruses are believed to be) is equivalent to isolation of the virus. It is not, and one of the groups of scientists was honest enough to admit this: “we did not perform tests for detecting infectious virus in blood”  https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)30183-5/fulltext
Under the heading ‘Discussion‘ another paper quietly admitted “Although our study does not fulfill Koch’s postulates,” https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2001017
3] NBC discloses the virus was never isolated“THEY DIDN’T ISOLATE THE VIRUS. THAT’S THE PROBLEM. I DO NOT SUSPECT I’T IS COMING FROM WHAT WE ORIGINALLY THOUGHT.”
Dr. Wu Zunyou, Chinese Center for Disease Control. https://www.bitchute.com/video/mGYefByrG0h0/
CDC SARS-CoV-2 Viral CulturingJune 2020: SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19 was isolated in the laboratory and is available for research by the scientific and medical community. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/lab/grows-virus-cell-culture.html
CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel“Since no quantified virus isolates of the 2019-nCoV were available for CDC use at the time the test was developed and this study conducted, assays designed for detection of the 2019-nCoV RNA were tested with characterized stocks of in vitro transcribed full length RNA.”
The term “quantified” means the CDC has no measurable amount of the virus because it is unavailable. Page 43 under ‘Performance Characteristics‘ https://www.fda.gov/media/134922/download
4] Fauci Covid-19 Dossier – crimes against humanityDr. David Martin’s decades of research is released under a creative commons license. He asks everyone to download and use the Dossier for the betterment of all, and report back with your results.
Download the Dossier free at https://sendfox.com/lp/1rl8j9
Crimes, unlike civil complaints, have to be prosecuted by law enforcement otherwise they go unpunished. Some of the 205 page Dossier is explained by Dr. Martin here. https://www.bitchute.com/video/gNs9zOj6CcyB/
5] The new m-RNA treatment is ‘not’ a vaccineSince SARSCOV 2 has never been proven to exist therefore covid-19 does not exist, so why the push to vaccinate everyone on the planet? Here’s why.
Catherine Austin Fitts compares the new mRNA treatment to a computer operating system, stating that just like Windows, there would be a ‘back door’ where technocrats will be able to control our bodies through regular ‘updates.’
Dr. David Martin says they use the term “vaccine” to sneak this thing under public health exemptions. This is not a vaccine. This is mRNA packaged in a fat envelope that is delivered to a cell. It is a medical device designed to stimulate the human cell into becoming a pathogen creator. Vaccines actually are a legally defined term under public health law; they are a legally defined term under CDC and FDA standards. The vaccine specifically has to stimulate both the immunity within the person receiving it, and it also has to disrupt transmission. And that is not what this is. https://ourgreaterdestiny.org/2021/01/mrna-vaccine-injects-an-operating-system-into-your-body-called-the-software-of-life-this-is-not-a-vaccine/
Many people are seriously injured or dying after receiving the m-RNA treatment. https://healthimpactnews.com/2021/cna-nursing-home-whistleblower-seniors-are-dying-like-flies-after-covid-injections-speak-out/
End harm and attempts to alter the nature of man
The intent of this resource is to inform people so they choose wisely, which includes whether or not to consent to the m-RNA treatment for themselves and children.
Please share the evidence with people you know, governments at all levels, police, medical colleges, health departments, business owners, religious leaders, etc. Thank you.
Without Prejudice and Without Recourse
Doreen A Agostino
Via ethernet to safeguard life
Professor Roger Seheult, MD explains the important role Vitamin D may have in the prevention and treatment of COVID-19. Dr. Seheult illustrates how Vitamin D works, summarizes the best available data and clinical trials on vitamin D, and discusses vitamin D dosage recommendations. Roger Seheult, MD is the co-founder and lead professor at https://www.medcram.com He is an Associate Professor at the University of California, Riverside School of Medicine and Assistant Prof. at Loma Linda University School of Medicine Dr. Seheult is Quadruple Board Certified: Internal Medicine, Pulmonary Disease, Critical Care, and Sleep Medicine Interviewer: Kyle Allred, Producer and Co-Founder of MedCram.com
A private practice is your best bet for receiving the highest quality of care at the lowest cost.
By Nicholas Grosso, M.D., Contributor
It's true that private physician practices are not as common as they once were. But don't write them off just yet: A private practice is still your best bet for receiving the highest quality of care at the lowest cost. And although the number of private practices has declined significantly in recent years, they are poised for a comeback under a new business model.
Here's what that means for consumers – and why you shouldn't give up on private practices:
Independence leads to the best care. Under the private practice model, physicians have full autonomy to make the decisions that will lead to the best outcome for the patient. The trusted doctor-patient relationship is comprised of just two parties: the physician and the patient.
A third party is often introduced to this relationship when physicians work for large hospitals or health systems. These health systems, primarily led by executives with no clinical training, have a surprising amount of influence in the medical decisions a physician is allowed to make. The organization might dictate what tests to perform, which brand of implants to use in orthopaedic surgery and even push for more surgeries regardless of whether they are truly required by the patient. As an orthopaedic surgeon who has spent much of my career serving patients at my own private practice, I have always valued the autonomy I have to make referrals to the best specialists, prioritize non-invasive treatment options and squeeze patients into my schedule for emergency visits. With this model, I have the latitude to make sure that every single treatment decision is based on evidence, best practices and the patient's health history.
Additionally, independent practices are much more nimble than large health systems or hospitals – which means that we can adopt new technology and techniques more quickly.
[See: HIPAA: Protecting Your Health Information.]
Private practice treatment can drive down expenses. Hospital treatment will always be the most expensive option for a variety of reasons, including site of service fees and reimbursement structures. Whenever possible, private practitioners can perform surgeries for low-risk patients in outpatient centers – which dramatically lowers costs while typically improving the patient experience.
A recent study published in Orthopaedic Reviews found that orthopaedic surgeries cost an average of $3,225 more when performed in a hospital setting compared to an outpatient clinic. And that's just the average – the research found that cost savings ranged from 17.6 percent to 57.6 percent. Another study found that ACL reconstruction surgery cost an average of $9,220 at an inpatient hospital facility and just $3,905 in an outpatient clinic. But the quality is not poorer because of the lower cost: Additional research has shown that outpatient care is simply more efficient, allowing patients to spend 25 percent less time in the ambulatory surgical center than they would in a hospital setting, while realizing the same clinical outcomes.
[See: 14 Things You Didn't Know About Nurses.]
The private practice model is evolving – not dying. The independent "super group" is a new business model that is rapidly gaining traction because it combines the best of both worlds. When individual practices join together, they can maintain the autonomy and standard of patient care that is unique to private practices – while also benefiting from shared financial resources, economies of scale and a broader network of services. My group, The Centers for Advanced Orthopaedics, was among the first to pilot this model, and today we are the largest private provider of orthopaedic care in the country and have more than 30 individual practices on board.
Our commitment to quality, the patient experience and efficient, low-cost services remains the same. But with the backing of a larger group, we can offer patients convenient access to local specialists, plus ancillary services like physical therapy. We also have the industry recognition to move forward with value-based care payment models, such as bundled payments.
Super groups are becoming an increasingly compelling and viable option for private practitioners of every specialty, from primary care to urology. If a super group doesn't already exist in your area, you will likely have one soon.
[See: 10 Questions Doctors Wish Their Patients Would Ask.]
So the next time you need to search for a medical professional, don't skip past the private practices and assume they won't be in business much longer. Instead, think about the independent care and cost savings they can provide, and make the decision based on your own circumstances. The private practice model, although it has certainly struggled in recent years, is here to stay.
Dr. Nicholas Grosso is president of The Centers for Advanced Orthopaedics.
Tags: patients, patient advice, health care, doctors
What Are the Truly Verifiable Facts Surrounding COVID-19?
Global Research, August 14, 2020“Nothing in life is to be feared, it is only to be understood. Now is the time to understand more, so that we may fear less.”
Those words, uttered by two-time Nobel Prize-winning chemist and physicist Marie Curie, are as relevant today as they were in her era (1867–1934). With most of the planet under some form of medical martial law, we would do well to follow her advice: understand more and fear less about the pandemic. The way to do that is to establish the verifiable, scientific facts about the SARS-CoV-2 virus and separate those facts from the fiction being touted by a fear-mongering news media. Only then will we stop surrendering our inherent freedoms to COVID-19 propaganda.
Fiction #1: Wearing a face mask will protect you and others from the coronavirus.
Fact #1: Contrary to what many medical and government officials tell us, there is no evidence to support the claim that face masks—whether N95, surgical, or cloth—protect the wearer from any virus. These so-called “medical experts” usually reference a purportedly scientific publication to support their claim. However, when the studies they point to—namely, in The Lancet and from the Mayo Clinic—are put under closer scrutiny, they fail to pass one crucial test: they never used a Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT). Reputable scientists consider the RCT the Holy Grail when it comes to conducting a study on a large group of people, because it eliminates the possibility of any population bias in the testing.
When we look at trials that have used the RCT method to analyze the efficacy of face masks, we find starkly different results from those that have not.
For instance, an exhaustive dental study conducted in 2016 revealed that disposable surgical face masks are incapable of providing protection from respiratory pathogens. Continue...
Do you find this information useful?
Please show your appreciation.
It's Likely You Have Been
Without Your Knowledge or Consent.
Correct Your Political Status.
Protect Yourself from Government Overreach.
Restore Lawful Government.
Body and Health Support