Loading summary
Transcript103 lines
- [00:00]
A
Hi, Ryan Reynolds here for Mint Mobile.
- [00:02]
B
Are you looking for a beach read this summer? May I suggest your big wireless bill? It's got suspense, mystery, a slightly flat emotional arc, and a shocking twist where you realize you've been overpaying the entire time.
- [00:13]
A
Fortunately, though, Mint's story is better.
- [00:15]
B
Every plan $15 a month, even unlimited. That's it. Happy ending, zero tears. Give it a try@mintmobile.com Switch upfront payment
- [00:23]
C
of $45 for three months, $90 for six months or $180 for a 12 month plan. Required $15 per month equivalent taxes and fees Extra initial plan term only greater than 50 gigabytes. Me slow when network is busy. See terms. Is vitamin C in an iv the miracle cure that big pharma does not want you to know about? Well, it sure seems that way. And so we are going to know about it until we're not going to be allowed to know about it. Now here's a story I want you to know. Before the pandemic, Dr. Paul Merrick and Dr. Pierre Kory tried to get the medical world to pay attention to the healing possibilities of vitamin c through an IV. Dr. Merrick had noticed that when patients are sick, their bodies deplete vitamin C quickly. And he began to give it to his patients for sepsis. Now, sepsis is a life threatening condition where the body's response to an infection begins to damage its own tissues and organs. It is a very bad sign. So he developed what he called the Hat Protocol, or sometimes now called the Merrick Protocol in 2016. And what he did was combine intravenous vitamin C, thiamine and hydrocortisone with his patients who were in the hospital. And in the hospital he worked for, he noticed that mortality from sepsis started to plummet in just the first year that he was using it. So clearly they had to take him down. Now, of course, vitamin C is an inexpensive and possibly effective therapy. So Dr. Merrick and Dr. Corey now have both been labeled as quacks for the simple crime of asking for more research and trials after they have seen it literally bring seriously ill patients back to life. They say it can possibly cure other ailments too. We're going to learn about that. But to prove that they are not crazy and not saying miraculously unproven things, all they've ever asked for were more trials and honest attention from the medical world. In fact, when Dr. Merrick first published his paper on this topic in 2017, here you can see his findings say there is a lot of benefit Here. But additional studies are required to confirm these findings. And yet when the studies have been done, they've been purposely designed to fail. Almost this protocol, the same thing that happened to ivermectin. Now, Dr. Merrick and Dr. Corey were both ready to take this to the mattresses, so to speak. But then the pandemic happened and this was back burnered. But they're back to it now. And so we are here to learn. But before we get to the doctors, I want to give you this important update. Because a California last week ruled that Dr. Corey could no longer be investigated and persecuted for giving his patients advice. This is big. The state of California had been trying to tell doctors, you can only say approved things or we're going to come after you. That is not their right. A court has validated that. And we're going to talk about that in a minute too with Dr. Corey. But first, this quick break. Well, it's back to school season, and that's not just about notebooks and backpacks and lunchboxes anymore. It's also about making sure that the devices that you will use are safe this year. Because, of course, the kids have laptops, some of them have phones. You need to make sure that they are safe online and protected, especially if they're logged into some kind of family Google plan or Apple plan or what have you. Well, that's why we like Webroot. They were founded in Boulder, Colorado, helping protect families online since 1996. So whether you need to protect just one device or the whole household, Webroot has flexible options that work across computers, phones and tablets. And what really stands out is that it protects your devices without slowing them down. It takes up to 33 times less space, scans 6 times faster, and installs 6.7 times faster than many competitors. It also works quietly in the background, helping protect you against ransomware, malware, suspicious links and other online threats. Plus, they have features like password manager and web threat shield, helping make everyday life easier and safer. So please do check them out@webroot.com redacted. You can get 60% off today. That's webroot.com redacted for your 60% off. Live a better digital life with Webroot because peace of mind shouldn't be optional. Gentlemen, thank you for coming. I wanna hear the backstory of vitamin C that has been kept from us. But first, let's give it a big wow. What could this possibly do? What are we hoping we can study? Are there implications, let's say, for cancer, immune disease, the Sky's the limit. Let's dream big and then get to the science of what we know.
- [05:06]
B
So can I talk, Pierre?
- [05:08]
A
Yeah, Paul, you can start.
- [05:09]
B
Pierre doesn't let me talk. So I'll tell you some interesting facts which most people do not know. So there are only two species on this planet that do not make vitamin C, and that is anthropoid primates and guinea pigs. All other species, animals and plant life make vitamin C. And vitamin C is an essential stress hormone. So humans have become vitamin C mutants. We cannot make vitamin C. So your little puppy dog or your cat becomes sick when it becomes stressed, increases production of vitamin C. That's the facts. There's overwhelming data. We know that there are significant fatal mutations in the enzyme, the rate limiting enzyme to make vitamin C in humans. So humans cannot make vitamin C when they stressed. And so if you, if you were to take a vitamin C producing fish and stress it and compare its cortisol levels to a vitamin C fish that can't make vitamin C, the cortisol levels are much higher because vitamin C is a stress hormone. It helps the organism deal with stress. And so when we talk about stress, we talk about any kind of physiological or psychological stress. So this could be the stress of trauma, the stress of surgery, the stress of being sick. This could also be psychological stress. So there's studies where they give vitamin C to students before an exam and find that they perform better if they're given a vitamin C. And so this human deficiency of vitamin C is a fundamental issue and people don't recognize it so.
- [07:31]
A
Well, you know, I just want to add to that, right, because I love when you, you've put out slides, right, where you show that humans, when they're in stressful situations, their cortisol shoots up. Meanwhile their vitamin C doesn't budge because we can't make it and we consume ours rapidly. Whereas mammals, their cortisol hardly budges, but they crank up their vitamin C and like goats, like when they're being transported in like close quarters or confined spaces, they absolutely shoot up their vitamin C and that's how they get through infections. And I gotta tell you, I had a colleague who used to run a cardiothoracic icu and there's nothing more stressful than cracking open your chest and operating on your heart. Those are like the biggest operations possible. And those patients come out really unstable hemodynamically. And he would just start infusing IV vitamin C and the patients would settle like you wouldn't believe. I mean, it's really, it was phenomenal watching at the bedside, to be honest. It's some of the more exciting physiology and treatments I've ever been, ever witnessed, truly.
- [08:30]
C
And so what you have seen is patients with sepsis turn around quickly. But what are some of the other implications of things that it could. In fact, are we talking like cancers or autoimmune disease? What, what are some things that you're hoping to see more research?
- [08:44]
A
Here's the problem, right? So when we both, Paul and I are both ICU doctors. So for us, when we're in the ICU, we're there, you know, 24 7, we're watching, we can, you know, you can put in orders, you can have patients and nurses infusing this, you know, four or five times a day and whatever dose you feel was necessary, you know, once you leave the hospital. And by the way, we got excommunicated from the system. I don't have direct clinical experience in terms of as an outpatient. Paul does a little bit. He's been involved in a case, but you know, I don't have a bricks and mortar clinic. But we know that from Linus Pauling, right? So Linus Pauling is the only two time Nobel prize winner. He's one of the greatest scientist in the history of science. I mean, he literally invented or basically created the field of biochemistry. He, in his late career, he was treating cancer with high doses of vitamin C. He was giving like 10 grams a day, which are really quite high. Paul and I in septic shock were giving 6 grams a day. And I think if we had to do it all over again, we would have gone even higher than that. But Paulman back in the 70s was giving these terminal cancer patients, they'd failed chemotherapy. He was giving them these high doses of vitamin c for like 10 days in a row. Then he would give him high dose of oral and he was reporting like extremely extended survival times and wellness in these patients. And you know, but that, you know, that was before the evidence based medicine and randomized control trials. So it's totally dismissed. But I think it's, its potential for other diseases would be really incalculable, to be honest, because Paul's talking about foundational physiology of how we keep ourselves healthy and stable and our physiology coordinated. And if I, vitamin C does that, I can't imagine a disease situation that doesn't work, Paul.
- [10:33]
B
So anytime that the human body is stressed, so we're talking a spectrum here. So we're talking about trauma patients, patients who are in motor vehicle accidents, patients who Fall, we're talking about surgical trauma. You know, there's nothing more traumatic than a surgeon attacking a patient with a
- [10:53]
A
knife, brain bleeds, things like that, right?
- [10:57]
B
Yeah. So anytime the human body is stressed and makes cortisol, if we were a goat or a rabbit, we would make vitamin C as well to deal with the stress. So the inference is that whenever the human body is severely stressed, then you need vitamin C. And the stress could be a respiratory tract infection, it could be pneumonia, it really doesn't matter. We're talking about human physiology. And vitamin C is really interesting. It does a lot of really important things. In order to make epinephrine and norepinephrine, which are the hormones to support blood pressure, you need vitamin C. You need vitamin C for good blood flow. You need vitamin C for the immune system. So vitamin C has. It's a very good antioxidant. Vitamin C has a whole host of physiological actions which have been well documented. You know, people think that, you know, this is just, you know, we making this stuff up. This is, you know.
- [12:12]
A
You know, Paul, one thing, though, because Natalie, actually, you talked about it in your introduction. I think you recognize we. We need to emphasize the difference between oral and intravenous. Those are two totally different things. It's not like I don't want someone to go home and. Or someone at home to. To get the message that, like, oh, I just need to pop a bunch of tablets of vitamin C and all will be well. Certainly vitamin C orally does something, but you can't even put it in the same. On the same page as intravenous, because what happens with oral vitamin C is that the transporters for absorption in your gut are really limited. So the concentrations that you can reach in the blood are. They will not combat septic shock. There's no way it would even make a dent in septic shock, even if you took it every four hours by the handful of. But when you give it intravenously, I mean, the absorption and the entry into the blood, it goes to 100%. And you can hit these incredibly high levels of vitamin C concentrations which overwhelm the body's ability to consume it. And that's where we saw these incredible physiologic responses. But we would not be able to see those responses with oral vitamin C. And that's actually one of the limitations, right, with vitamin C is that, like, now that it has to be given intravenously, now you have barriers to access. Right. So there's cost and clinics and all that.
- [13:34]
C
Well, that's what gives me anxiety, because I read your chapter on it, and I read the introduction to your book, the War on Ivermectin. And the idea that you could know this, that you could have a very sick relative or be sick yourself and say, I would like some intravenous vitamin C. And they could say, no, that's not proven. You can't have it. That's very anxietizing, because then, like you said, it's a walled garden and I couldn't have it. And there'd be a doctor who's not up on this research.
- [14:02]
A
It's not that they can say it. They will say it. Paul, you. Paul has an inbox full of people's stories, as do I, who followed our research, have us explain what we saw, how we measured what we did, and why the randomized controlled trials couldn't measure what we did. It's all about timing. And the stories that come back to us is that they have. They go for loved ones who are in the ICU's. Doctor, please, could you put them on the Marek protocol? No, that doesn't work. We won't do it. And they will literally refuse something as safe and fundamental as intravenous vitamin C. It happens all the time.
- [14:36]
C
Do they usually have it in the hospital? Yes, they usually have it.
- [14:41]
B
Yes, they do. So that's how I started it, because I had this brilliant idea. Brilliant. Very, very sick patient who was dying. This is how this all started. And I thought, you know, as a doctor, the bedside. So Pierre and I actually are real doctors. We. We think at the bedside and we contemplate. And so I had this patient who was clearly dying of overwhelming sepsis. And I thought, what can I do? And I had read about vitamin C, so I thought, let me try it. And most pharmacies have vitamin C. They use it for intravenous nutrition. So I said, let me try it. And so I gave it to her, expecting that when I came the next morning, she would be dead. And I was absolutely stunned. She was sitting up in bed. She was verbal, she was communicative. We took out her breathing tube and her kidneys started working. It was a truly remarkable thing to see.
- [15:43]
A
Can I just add that? So, Natalie, what makes an expert? And I always used to teach my students this. Is that what differentiated me from my students? We all read the same books. We'd all been completely harassed with memorizing sheets of facts. We have the knowledge, but what changes is pattern recognition and experience. And so when you see diseases, especially one is overwhelmingly devastating, a Septic shock. You know, the trajectories. You know how that goes. And, you know, even when they turn around, it's a slow turnaround. Like the. You know, the amount of pressure requirements to maintain blood pressure will peak and then slowly come down. And, you know, you can get some people through. You also lose people. But what happened to me is I just want to repeat what Paul said, because this is how Paul and I actually, this is. Our whole relationship started over that experience, which is. I heard Paul's paper. I'd read it, I'd ignored it. I was like, it was so ridiculous. I'd never heard of anything so outlandish. Like, he's reporting in his paper, you know, a reduction in mortality from 40%. So he took the sickest patients, and he compared them the year before he started to the year after, and the mortality was 40%. That's what they were predicted at dying. We have a very good prediction score in IC medicine. They could use all these variables, and it tells you very accurately, on average, what a patient with that score, what their chance of survival is. So he took patients with a 60% chance at survival, and he got 92% of them to actually make it out of the ICU alive. So it was mortality from 40 down to 8. There is nothing in the history of medicine, outside of maybe defibrillating someone in V fib that has ever led to a mortality reduction like that. So when I saw that in one of the top journals in my specialty and I saw what he was doing, I didn't understand the difference between the intravenous vitamin C and oral. I was just like, oh, come on. Vitamins. Two vitamins and a little touch of a stress steroid, like a stress hormone. You get a little hydrocortisone. It just didn't compute to me. A lot of my colleagues were like, oh, it's just Merrick Marek. Paul was really famous in our specialty for always going against the establishment, always having a contrarian view that he could defend very well. And I think people might have written him off, like he lost it or something. I just didn't know what to make of it, and I just ignored it. And then I. What happened to me is what happened to Paul is a couple years later, had this family just completely begging me to try something for their loved one. And the guy was hours from death. I gave it to him. He died anyway. But he was really. There was no way that could save him. But just using it that once and realizing that it was something really safe, inexpensive, and it Was like another tool in the toolbox. I'm like, let me keep using this. Literally within two days, I had a guy come from the bone marrow transplant floor. So without getting into too much detail, when you get a bone marrow transplant, they literally kill your bone marrow first so that you have no more cells left in the marrow, you have no more immune system. They hit you with mustard gas and chemotherapy agents. And so when you get your transplant, you start with like no immune system. And during that window, and it's famous, I mean, bone marrow transplant 4 is they are watching those patients so carefully because their risk of going into severe sepsis is so high because they can't even fend off their gut organisms. So their gut organisms like E. Coli will translocate, go into the blood and they will come in as septic. As you can see, they'll come in in multi organ failure. Sure enough, I get a guy roll in during my morning rounds with my team. I see him coming in, he is going down fast. I look at his chart. It started like in the middle of the night. Anyway, I start Paul's protocol and by the time that was 11am when he got in, by 3pm I could see him already settling. And I actually went home for the evening. And when I walked in the morning, just like Paul talked about, this guy was in a chair outside of his ICU bed eating scrambled eggs. He was on no vasopress and he was literally about to be transferred back to the bone marrow transplant floor. So that's less than 24 hours after coming into my ICU on two pressers, not making any urine, delirious and breathing fast, requiring oxygen. He's literally off oxygen, off pressers, a bag full of urine in his collection bag, and he was getting wheeled back to the bone marrow transplant floor. I couldn't even think for the rest of the day. And then I just like within two days, I think I reached out to Paul, he and I were on the phone and then the rest is history. Right, Paul, look at us now, right?
- [20:14]
C
Fighting the good fight. And so if somebody I knew was really sick and I wanted this, could you go to one of those IV places and start there instead of the emergency room? Do they have vitamin C?
- [20:28]
A
The problem there is you need IV antibiotics. We're talking about severe sepsis, right? You're going to need and someone who's really sick of sepsis. They tend to be altered mental status. They're not drinking enough fluids, they're dehydrated, so they need like a touch of fluid. Some IV antibiotics and IV vitamin C. So it's not.
- [20:47]
C
You can't just do this yourself. You've got to have doctors on board.
- [20:51]
A
However, let me give you my own anecdote. So I, for the first time in my life about a year ago, got really sick in the abdomen. I'd never been this ill. High fevers, excruciating pain. The short answer is that it was clearly an intestinal infection, some sort of colitis. I don't know. I don't think it was appendicitis. But I ended up. And I refused to go to a hospital. I'm so terrified of hospitals at this point in history that I refused and I treated myself with. Got me through the first day. Things had already settled out, but I was really dehydrated and not feeling well. And I called the mobile infusion center and I got fluids and. And IV vitamin C. After those fluids and IV vitamin C, I was like a new man. I don't know if it was the vitamin C or the fluids, but, like, it was exactly what I needed. And within three days, I was back on the tennis court.
- [21:40]
C
So the first protocol you just said, we may need to take that out of the YouTube version. If you're watching this on the YouTube version, there's a reason for that. Please watch my other interview with Dr. Corey. It's called the therapy that terrifies big pharma, because YouTube prevents us from saying exactly what he just said. So if you heard a bleep, you need to be on a different platform, and there's a reason for that. So let's talk about the reason the both of you are so hunted in the medical community for something so simple. But first, let's take a quick break. Think about how much you spend to get a customer to call you. Or maybe it's just advertising or referrals. Maybe it's years of building a reputation. If that phone rings and you've done all that work and then nobody answers, well, there's a good chance they're calling the next business on the list. That's why today's episode is brought to you by quo. That's quo, the business phone system built so you never miss a call. With quo, all of your calls, texts and voicemails live in one place. So anyone on your team can jump into the conversation, see the full history, and respond quickly. It sets up in minutes on virtually any device and lets you keep your existing business number. And it grows with your team without the IT headaches. One feature we really like is the built in AI agent. It can answer after hours calls, respond to common questions, and even book appointments so potential customers don't hit a dead end when your office is closed. Quo also integrates into tools like HubSpot, Zapier and Claude and more to keep you organized. Money is on the line, so make sure that you're always ready to say hello with Quo. Now you can try Quo for free, plus get 20% off your first six months when you go to quo.com redacted. Again, that's qu-uo.com redacted. All right, before the break, we talked about how both of the doctors on the show today, Dr. Corey and Dr. Merrick, have been labeled quacks for suggesting very simple protocols such as intravenous vitamin C. Now if you Google either of them, that's exactly what you're going to get. They're controversial, they're unproven, they're paranoid, all kinds of things. I think. Now that doesn't really hurt your feelings. That's sort of a badge of honor. But talk about the reaction to this because it's just such a cheap and simple therapeutic.
- [24:06]
A
Go ahead, Paul.
- [24:06]
B
Yeah, sorry. The thing about vitamin C is that it's exceeding. You know, we like to use things that are safe. And, you know, when we talk about ivermectin, it's the same thing. So we like to use things that are safe. Vitamin C is safe. It cannot harm you even they use doses up to 70 to 100 grams intravenously and it's well tolerated and it's cheap. So if something is safe and it's cheap, it's a severe significant threat to the pharmaceutical industry. They do not like such drugs. And the thing about vitamin C is that it is safe, you know, because, you know, the first law or the first dictum in medicine is first do no harm. And so vitamin C is exceedingly safe. It's impossible to harm a patient with vitamin C and it's inexpensive.
- [25:06]
A
Yeah. Let me correct the record though, Natalie, just because I think it's important. So Paul's work on IV vitamin C as well as mine, he and I became very collegial and we collaborated. That actually didn't run us into any trouble. What happened is I think we both got somewhat humiliated when that first randomized controlled trial was presented because it made it seem like we didn't know what we were talking about. The problem with that randomized controlled trial is it didn't replicate the conditions in which we give it, which is we give it early. Like as soon as they Come into the hospital. That trial gave it like 30 hours into the ICU. I mean, it's completely ridiculous. It even I, with IV vitamin C couldn't save someone 30 hours into septic shock. So like the trial definitely found what it found, but there was a reason it found what it found. But.
- [25:55]
C
So do you think that was on purpose? They designed it.
- [25:58]
A
You know, here's the thing. Now is like as cynical as I've been, come. I still think I have the capacity to be naive. And I think maybe with the first trial it was an honest oversight. But it's very hard to argue that because septic shock is a medical emergency, if you're going to test anything that might save a life on the order of what Paul was claiming, how could you wait 30 hours into a medical emergency that's life threatening in order to give it? Well, that's also the problem with randomized controlled trials and acute illnesses. By the time they assess for criteria, get consent, enroll, randomize, order the medicines you're talking about these inordinate delays that do not match lived reality. But guess what? Guess what ends up on the pages of a high impact medical journal. These august institutions carrying out these perfectly designed and conducted randomized controlled trials where they have basically things that are devoid from reality. So when the studies came out saying that they didn't work, I think Paul and I were more humiliated and our credibility took a hit rather than anything else. What really caused us to be excommunicated was finding really safe, highly effective alternatives to what the government and the pharmaceutical industry wanted to do in Covid. Ivermectin was our death knell. You know, when Paul identified ivermectin and he and I both started advocating for it, that's really what ended our careers. Vitamin C was just, I don't know, the first rodeo. But I got to tell you, the rest of the trials and Paul, you shouldn't wait on this. The fact that you know Paul's defense after that first trial, and I wrote the paper and I showed my data which showed that the survival was totally dependent on timing. Earlier you gave it, the more effective was, guess what? Academia continued to do large randomized control trials with incredible delays before therapy. Correct, Paul, the other big trials, if
- [27:54]
B
you just think about it, these are critically ill patients who are busy dying. Why would you delay giving therapy? There's no medical intervention that benefits from a delay in institution. I mean, there were some patients in these trials that were transferred from one hospital to another hospital before they got it. So you can imagine the enormous time delay. Whereas what we did, and it only became clearly obvious once we analyzed the data and we thought about it, patients came to our ed, we went down to the emergency department, and we started treatment in the emergency department. Isn't that the most logical thing to do? You start treatment immediately, you give antibiotics, and you give vitamin C at the same time. You don't wait two or three days.
- [28:49]
A
Paul, let me play devil's advocate, because I think this is a really important point that the public needs to understand. Not only is there delays that are automatic when you do a trial, right, because of all of those steps you have to go to to put someone in a trial. But the thing is, is the opposite thing is true, is Paul's hospital and the system and the way his ICU ran is not completely unique, but it's extremely rare in the organization of hospitals. And that is. And when I learned this, that's why I finally figured out why Paul's results are completely different than everyone else's, even mine, because I worked in a hospital that didn't have the same system as his. And it's very simple. When someone comes into the emergency room, so someone really sick who's going to eventually need the icu, they first get admitted to the emergency department. That team then evaluates, stabilizes, starts treatment, maybe a antibiotic, and they call upstairs to the icu. I go down with my team. I go look at the patient. Are they sick enough to need the ICU or are they not sick enough? And that's a really challenging question that I had to face my whole career. And so you have to make those decisions at the bedside because you have to triage ICU beds. We do not have an inexhaustible supply. So when I saw someone who clearly I knew was going south and was going to need the ICU and a lot of support, I'd say, please admit them to the icu. They would get wheeled upstairs sometime later when the bed was ready, and that's when we would write our treatment orders. So think about how many hours that is before they get started on a marriage protocol. Paul's hospital. I don't know how they came up with the system, but literally when the ED docs put their eyes on someone who looked really sick, boom, immediate call. And he was immediately on the ICU service. And the ICU team put in the orders. So emergency department nurses were hanging IV vitamin C. And that's why Paul had, like, literally, I mean, just very few deaths. And you're talking about one of the most common causes of death in the world. World. Paul, you know that data, how many millions of people, what's the number cause deaths of sepsis in the world?
- [31:00]
B
Like 2 to 3 million. I think just in the US alone, about 300,000 people die every year from sepsis. It's the commonest cause of death in the hospital, sepsis. And so you would imagine people would pay attention and do what you could to reduce the risk. So I'll tell you something which is interesting because people thought that we were making this data, it was just too good to be true at that particular time. Medicaid, they obsessed with quality indicators, that's what they do. And they had sepsis as a quality indicator. So they had a independent company called Truvan actually go from hospital to hospital looking at hospital mortality and they reported this data to the hospital administration. So our hospital administrator gave us the data independently. And what they showed, I mean it's truly astonishing is that when we started this in 2016, the hospital sepsis mortality was 40%. 2017, it was 8%. So it almost completely duplicated what we found. And the data was collected totally independently. Right.
- [32:28]
C
I have the chart here from Dr. Corey's book that he.
- [32:31]
A
Yeah, and also Paul, the reason why they sent that to the your hospital co is because they'd never seen anything like it was. Paul worked in a tertiary care center that served like, I don't know, a million and a half people. At tertiary care centers you get the sickest of the sick. Both he and I have always worked in tertiary care centers. No one has ever heard of a. It ended up bottoming out at 6% mortality. I don't think anyone at CMS or Medicare or Truvan, which is part of IBM, they had never seen a tertiary care center with 6% mortality. So they've uninvited, unprompted, sent the data to the CEO. You would think that enough should be like headline news and the, you know, the rest of the field would pay attention, but no, it doesn't come dressed up in a randomized controlled trial. So it's interesting but not important.
- [33:21]
C
And so what is the true cost of it? There's no big pharma brand attached to
- [33:28]
A
it, so there is. So the company that makes. I remember this because I talked to my pharmacist because I was using a lot of it and so and I was very friendly with our ICU pharmacist and I would say to him like, I'm like, how much, how much am I adding to the Patient's costs. And although, yes, a vial. So like I was, we would give it every six hours. So Paul's protocol was one and a half grams IV every six hours. So it's six a day and the vial to make one and a half. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think it was somewhere around three to $500. Okay, so let's talk about maybe $2,000 a day, right? Because there was really one company that they bought it from. But when you take $2,000 a day and stack it up next to the labor costs of caring for an ICU patient, which is the ratio is two patients to one nurse, 24 hour nursing. You have respiratory therapists, nutritionists, social workers, intensive care unit doctors. It's like it's a pittance compared to the cost of a daily cost of caring for an ICU patient.
- [34:29]
C
And so did you use it during the pandemic on COVID patients as well?
- [34:33]
A
Yes. Yes, absolutely.
- [34:36]
B
So the answer is yes, which is one of the reasons we actually were excommunicated from the medical community. Is that what we did when patients, you know, we recognized something strange was going on. These patients had Covid pneumonia, which here we called this organizing pneumonia. We could see what was happening. So what we did is we developed a protocol called the meth protocol, which was methylprednisolone, ascorbic acid, thiamine and heparin. And we used it. And what we found is the overall hospital mortality for Covid pneumonia was about 20%. Our mortality was about 8 to 10%. And we published this data, they did not like our data. They retracted our data, retracted our paper, because we were going against the standard of care. And so that's what you don't do in this country, particularly. You don't question the standard of care, particularly when it came to Covid, because they wanted to give a drug called Remdesivir. And as we know, Remdesivir actually increases your risk of dying. So you figure that one out.
- [36:08]
C
What is the joke the nurses call it? Death is near or something Run.
- [36:12]
A
Death is near.
- [36:13]
C
Death is near. Right.
- [36:16]
A
Let me make one point though, Paul, because I think now that what you're asking, and I want to be honest about this, so the way in which I would see turnarounds, like, literally, I don't want to overuse the word, like resurrection, but I'd see these unbelievable reversals in severe septic shock, especially when given early. Covid is a slow moving fire. First of all, they're not coming to the hospital People weren't getting hospitalized until day eight. That's when the lung phase would set in. And typically by the time they got to the icu, they would first go to the wards and then as they were continuing to decline. So by the time they got the ICU, you're talking about someone who's on average 10 to 12 days in, their lungs are already significantly damaged. And I did not see reversals like I did with septic shock. In fact, there was not. In fact, I had patients where, I mean, I could start it. I was doubling doses. I was doing four grams every six hours. And I really didn't see a movement that much because it was started too late. But again, let's go back to Paul's hospital. Paul got to them early. You know, they were getting to his ICU a lot earlier than I was. I was getting patients who'd been on the wards for five days on like 50 oxygen or even full masks. And by the time they come in, me, because they need a ventilator, you know, intubation and a ventilator. I mean, the lungs are toast. There's no bringing it back with IV vitamin C. So I just want to make sure that we're clear on, like, I don't want to over promise its efficacy, but, you know, I love what Paul says. There is no treatment in the world that doesn't work better earlier. Cancer, whatever it is, anything you treat, the sooner you start, the better outcomes you're going to get. And some reason that scientific law gets lost in medicine.
- [38:01]
B
So an interesting anecdote obviously here. And I put ivermectin on the map and people did not like that because ivermectin, as it so happens, is quite effective for Covid. And it was a threat to the licensing of the vaccines because according to the FDA regulations, if there's an effective alternative therapy, you can't approve it. So Ivermectin was a significant threat to the licensing of the vaccine. So they went after us like you cannot believe.
- [38:42]
A
Good times.
- [38:43]
C
I can believe it.
- [38:45]
B
Yeah. And that's why we became, you know, we. We became enemy number one. And what was interesting is that during the COVID fiasco, we were accused, or I was accused of falsifying. So this is 2021, 2022. I was accused of falsifying the data from our study published in 2017. They sent a complaint to the journal and the hospital and our ethics committee saying that I had fabricated the data. Can you believe it? They were just trying to go after us. So the Long and the short of it was the journal. Actually. I gave them the data. They went through our data, they spent a year analyzing. And they said we were absolutely correct, that they wanted two small changes in language. So the study actually stood up. So, you know, we have two independent validations of our study, but they were that aggressively went after us because Paul,
- [39:57]
A
you know, I want to bring up something too, right? So the war in Covid and what happened to Paul and myself for advocating for highly effective alternative therapies that really worked, that could have saved a lot of lives. You know, the persecution, you know, they stripped our specialty boards. Paul got the worst treatment. The hospital that he worked at, that he was a leader of, that he'd won awards for that when he was tenured at their medical school, they suddenly turn around, they fabricated complaints and they stripped his privileges and fired him and they ended his career. But here's why I want to bring that up. This is the same hospital that when he started using his protocol in 2017, guess what they did? They called news stations and they were saying that the great Dr. Marek had come up with a cure for sepsis. And these news stations would come and they were interviewing nurses, they were interviewing patients. And it was like this incredible story that was showing up on the news. It petered out, never got any traction. But I just think it's pretty incredible that the same hospital that thought he was a hero before COVID you know, took him down so viciously for doing the right thing in Covid.
- [41:04]
C
Right. And it's hard to put much stock now into these studies. I saw one today about ivermectin that's being studied on cancer patients in conjunction with chemotherapy. So how is the public going to know what's effective or not? You know, when they come out and say, well, ivermectin did or did not advance chemotherapy in certain patients, that it seems like they're constantly. You have to look at who's funding these studies. And it's so frustrating as someone who just wants to understand what they're trying to tell us, right?
- [41:39]
A
It's a university conducted trial at this point of patented pharmaceutical. You have to have serious doubts. A university or academic funded trial of a medicine that could threaten the markets for all sorts of therapeutics. You know, we saw what they did in with Ivermecta. We saw what they did with hydroxychloroquine. It's part of. It's literally standard operating procedure in the pharmaceutical industry. They don't even think of this as a departure from what they're supposed to do, they have to protect the markets for their products. Cancer is the biggest bear out there. You don't mess with cancer. You mean effective therapies there are for cancer that nobody knows about because they don't bring about.
- [42:24]
C
No, I don't. It's one of them, right? What he just said.
- [42:34]
B
View it.
- [42:35]
C
View this on. Not YouTube. I mean, I spoke to Dr. Mary Bowden recently, and I said, you know, why is this statement coming out from the oncology, American Institute of Oncology, whatever they're called, saying like, doctors needs to suss out which of their patients are on ivermectin and discourage them? And she's like. Because they're all on it. They're just not telling their doctors that cancer patients are just gonna do it anyway because they don't trust the system anymore. But then not tell. And that seems dangerous to not tell your doctor what you're up to. But they don't trust their doctors either. And I'm like, what. What world are we living in, right? That this. This is a reality.
- [43:13]
A
It's.
- [43:13]
B
It's insane. So the way it actually works is that there are doctors these days don't think that they can't exercise independent judgment. They're given protocols, which are largely written by big pharma, and unless they follow the protocols, they do not get paid. And what makes it even worse is oncologists get paid for giving chemotherapy. It was studied in an oncology journal looking at the benefit of oncological therapy in the last 20 years in terms of prolonging life. The answer was 3.4 months. That's how impactful their chemotherapy actually is.
- [44:00]
C
3.4 very sick months. Miserable.
- [44:03]
B
Yes, absolutely.
- [44:04]
A
Exactly. And the other thing is, to your point, about patients not telling their doctors. So my.
- [44:11]
B
My.
- [44:11]
A
I do telehealth. We. My practice with my partners, we treat patients in all 50 states. We, we.
- [44:18]
B
We. We.
- [44:19]
A
We use combination repurposed drugs along. Using metabolic pathways to treat cancer. Because cancer is actually a metabolic disease. It's not genetic. But I don't want to get into that. But I will tell you, patient after patient, either a. They don't tell their oncologist or they ask me. So I'm always in this uncomfortable position. They're like, so should I tell my oncologist? And I'm like, listen, prior to Covid, I could never imagine me telling a patient, don't tell your doctor. And I don't tell them that. I don't say, don't tell your doctor. I said, you need to use your judgment. Because what happens is telling them this is the real harm of telling them is it changes the tenor and the dynamic of their relationship. I've heard too many patients recount this to me is when they actually are honest and they share what they're doing, or God forbid, they share that they're also a patient of Dr. Peter Corey. Like, it changes the dynamics between them. They find that the doctor is suddenly a little bit more distant or starts to think that they're like a little woohoo, little conspiracy theory, tin hat type thing, and it's really damaging. And it's not good to not have a woohoo, warm and hopefully empathetic connected relationship with your physician. So I just tell them to use their judgment. And many of them don't even ask me. They just say, I'm not telling my oncologist. Are you kidding me? I don't need to. I don't want to get into this with them. They know nothing. They know nothing.
- [45:42]
B
Pierre's absolutely correct, is that most patients, when it comes to diet, if you discuss it with an oncologist, the standard phrase is you can eat whatever you want to. It doesn't make a difference. So when it comes to diet or repurposed drugs, they just won't speak with oncologists because the oncologist will poo, poo it and tell them that there's no science behind it and that they shouldn't do it. They don't understand the science. They don't want to understand the science. It threatens their income to understand the science. And it's a travesty because it should be a partnership between the patient and the doctor. There should be communication and there should be mutual respect and understanding. But the way it is, the doctors are the dictators. They tell patients what they're going to get, and that's the way it is. Patients cannot participate in their own treatment. And that's the tragedy of the system, right?
- [46:44]
A
You know the famous phrase from Upton Sinclair, it can never be more apt than with oncology. Right? It goes something like, it is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it. And I think that's as apt for oncology as anything.
- [47:03]
C
I want to talk about this litigation win because I think it plays into whether or not you can prescribe these treatments, whether or not you can talk about things with your doctor, whether or not you can find a doctor who's willing to do this. But let's take a quick break and then we'll come back and you can tell us about this big court win. We want to tell you about our friends over at Lear Capital because have you ever looked at one of the big investment stories of the year and thought, gosh, I just wish I'd gotten in on that sooner. Maybe it was SpaceX, maybe it was AI. By the time everyone's talking about it, a lot of the upside has already happened. But what if the next opportunity isn't in a headline? What if what's making the headline possible is silver? Well, of course, silver is a critical material behind the AI revolution. It's used in technology that powers data centers, advanced electronics, robotics. The infrastructure that AI depends on, AI continues growing the way many suspect that it will. And if that happens, demand for silver could grow right alongside with it. And remember, silver's price prediction is still at $150 an ounce. That's why we want you to call our friends at Lear Capital and get their free report called the AI Revolution. It explains why so many investors are taking a closer look at silver and what could be driving that demand in the years ahead. You can call them, ask any question you want about the demand for silver. How you can own some, how you can invest. You can call them today at 800-613-3557 and get your free, free copy of the report today. And while you're on the phone, ask how you can qualify for up to $20,000 in bonus silver. Of course, we've been buying silver for years. We will continue to buy it until the cows come home. So figure out how you can too. Call them. Or go to learedacted.com or again, that number is 800-613-3557. Or again, it's Lear redacted.com. all right. Last week, Dr. Corey received a big litigation win. He had been litigating the state of California, hunting him, basically because he had been treating patients with unapproved therapeutics during the pandemic, such as Ivermectin. They threatened to take his license. They basically were witch hunting him. And he took it to the mattresses, as they say, it's a godfather saying, right? And took it to courts and said, you cannot tell doctors how to treat their patients. And a court said, you're right, they can't. So, Dr. Corey, tell us about this and what this means for patients rights as well as doctors rights.
- [49:36]
A
So I got to correct. I have to make the correct you a little bit.
- [49:39]
C
Okay.
- [49:40]
B
Really?
- [49:40]
A
Because it wasn't about. Because I think it's really important because they still can do that. They can come after you for how you treat patients. If you are departing from what they determine is the standard of care and you're treating somebody, somebody with something, they will. They will use those that conduct and they will go after you. This was more absurd. This was about speech. The state of California, which I like to call Clownifornia, they literally passed a law which made it made a doctor's license under threat if they spoke to a patient about an opinion that deviated from consensus, scientific consensus. Do you remember the consensus of safe and effective with the vaccines?
- [50:31]
C
Oh, yeah.
- [50:31]
A
That's what that law was about. It was literally telling doctors who are licensed in California, which I was at the time, that I could not say something but that stupid phrase, safe and effective. So if I did, if I had the courage, the integrity and the expertise to understand that they were not safe in any degree or measure and they were nowhere near anything effective, if I knew that and wanted to tell a patient that in California, my license and my livelihood would have been revoked. And so that was clearly a violation of the First Amendment. And I will tell you, my lawyer, who's just phenomenal, Rick Jaffe and the Children's Health Defense, Bobby Kennedy's organization that he helped found, which is a legal organization, they take on these kind of brazen absurdities in the law all the time. And so we brought a lawsuit with two other colleagues of mine who also were licensed in California. And it's been three and a half years. We lost right out of the gate. They actually said that the first judge, the judge, when he first heard the case, he said, no, no, this is conduct. What you say if it departs from standard of care, that would be considered conduct. And yes, this law can regulate your conduct. And we were like, this isn't conduct. This is speech. And so then we took it to the Supreme Court. Justice Kagan denied us. Then we appealed, and then we had 10 months of silence from the Supreme Court because they were hearing another case that was very similar. And when they finally concluded is that clearly this is First Amendment protected speech, then it went back to the federal court. And the same judge who initially denied us, now just last week granted a motion, a stay of any action. So we're protected from California right now. And just so you know, when a federal judge grants a motion like that, basically they never do it unless they know the way the case is going to go. So we're effectively being told that we won the case, although it's not official Yet. And you know, it's just, it was after years of just brazen oppression and violation of all of our liberties of any sorts of forms. And they really went after a doctor for, for being an expert, for being well studied, well read. You know, I would never tell some, somebody something that I didn't know was true, that I didn't think was really important for them to know. And so to, to be told that I have to list, literally listen to what the state is telling me. I have to tell state propaganda in my patients. That is absolutely absurd. What country are we living in? This is absolutely crazy.
- [53:08]
C
Well, it's, it's terrifying to think as you lay out in your book the war on Ivermectin, that you were starting to get a script of only approved ways to treat these people. And most of it was like, let them die until vaccine and resmis. Death of fear. Sorry. And that is terrifying to think that you can only have a doctor who must follow government lines or else.
- [53:34]
A
And so that was, that was Paul's story. Paul, can you tell that real quick? I mean, what happened to you in the icu? What they did to you?
- [53:42]
B
Yeah. So just before we get that, what you may not know is Dr. Bowdoin, myself and Dr. Eptis sued the FDA. If you remember, the FDA came up with the slogan, you're not a horse, you're not a dog, you know,
- [53:57]
A
and
- [53:58]
B
it was very effective. And you know, people to this day think that it's a, it's a horse dewormer. And so that was illegal. And we actually successfully sued the FDA for doing that because the goal was to dissuade doctors from using Ivermectin. What happened to me in the ICU is that I was, you know, I was an ICU doctor, I was in charge and I was prohibited by the hospital. They wrote a memo to every single member of staff of the entire healthcare system basically saying that the drugs that I used to treat Covid were no longer permissible to be used in the icu. So I would walk around the ICU and the only thing I could give was Remdesivir, which I refused to do because it kills patients. So I was in the situation where I had like a 23 year old girl with COVID who I couldn't treat because the hospital was preventing me. I was told that I could not use the medication that I wanted to
- [55:08]
A
use, including IV vitamin C. Right, Paul?
- [55:11]
B
Yeah. These were all FDA approved medications. It wasn't like I was using experimental drugs that had never Been used. These were all FDA approved drugs. Steroids, vitamin C, heparin, and thiamine. But I was prohibited from using them because it was going against the standard of care and we were getting good results. And eventually what they did is they. It's called sham peer review. They made up a whole bunch of completely fabricated complaints against me. So I must tell you, in my 35 years, I'd never had a complaint. I've never been sued. I've never had any student complaint. Suddenly I was being challenged, and I was told by the peer review committee that I was forcing nurses to do things like give patients drugs to which they were allergic. Can you imagine something so insane? So the hospital made up these completely fabricated complaints. They had no paperwork, they had no evidence that I had done this. And then I had, like a kangaroo court where I was not allowed any legal representation. And I was found guilty of all these crimes. And obviously then they had to get rid of me. So that's how my career was ended, because they didn't like what I was doing. And they came up with this sham peer review. That's how it works in this country.
- [56:58]
C
I don't know how you had the stomach for litigation, because that's agony. And the people who are fighting you have deep pockets. You know, my mother was trying to tell her about Ivermectin recently, and she was like, I don't know, scary. I need to see more about this. I'm not ready to. And I. But then I'm like, mom, you. You know, here's some corruption. And she goes, oh, yes, I watch the Fugitive. So she. She's like, for that reason, I believe you. She believes in the corruption. It's a great film, right?
- [57:29]
A
It is a good film.
- [57:30]
C
I'm talking about the Harrison Ford one. I never saw the original. So it's like, we know this, but we still get scared, right? Logically. So, yeah. I just want to ask you, I guess, Dr. Merrick, how do. How do you have the. The cojones to, you know, take on litigation like that?
- [57:51]
B
Yeah, I mean, obviously it was devastating. And, you know, you, as a physician, you, you know, Pierre and I were taught to do the right thing, and we did the right thing. And we both had our boards revoked. We had our license. I had my license removed. But you know what? You have to do the right thing. At the end of the day, you actually have to do the right thing because your integrity depends upon it. And so we paid an enormous price. But I think, you know, we did the right thing. And I think, you know, history will show we did the right thing. And we, you know, we can see what's going on now with this Dr. Fauci issue is that, you know, most of what they did during COVID was based on nonsense they had invented. You know, the six foot rule he invented.
- [58:47]
C
Oh, let me tell you my favorite, because I read the Fauci journals up to page like 700. My favorite one is when he says, oh, today I accidentally butt dialed Barbra Streisand. And then she called me back and I said, oh, well, I was gonna call you anyway. She said, because I've had shingles recently on my butt, and I'm wondering, is the MRNA vaccine safe for people with shingles? And I told her it was totally fine. And I know and you know that there's no research on how the MRNA vaccine interacts with something like shingles. There's no research on how it interacts with a man. Myriad different types of things. And he makes it up because he's starstruck by Barbra Streisand. And he says, absolutely, it's fine. And to my mind, if she had gotten sick from the vaccine, she would have a case against him because he's talking out of his ass. That's my favorite one. So, anyway, please go ahead. I just had to share.
- [59:45]
B
Yeah, so, I mean, that's a good example of almost everything that they did was not based on science. The masks, the six foot rule, the social isolation.
- [60:00]
A
Paul, let me give you that example because it's the one that it's still like, I don't know that I have PTSD from those years, but there are some events and some actions that Fauci did, which I will never forget for the rest of my life. And Paul and I were probably two of the leading clinical experts in the use of ivermectin in Covid during those. During those years. And on August 29, 2021, this is about 13 days after that FDA tweet, you are not a horse, you're not a cow. And I detail this in my book. That was a very sequenced series of actions. So it started out with the tweet from the fda. Few days later, the CDC sends a memo to every doctor in the country, every state department of health, WHO then sends it to every licensed doctor. And it basically warns of the dangers of ivermectin, literally the safest drug in history, the one that was handed out for free across continents by the WHO throughout the 80s and 90s. And for whom is the reason why Amura won the Nobel Prize because it's a transformative medicine. CDC says that suddenly it's a dangerous one and people are overdosing and don't give it to them. And then Fauci from the NIH gets invited on CNN with Jake Tapper and Jake Tapper asks him about the horse dewormer. And what does Fauci say? Right there in the middle of like the delta wave, he goes, there's no clinical evidence that this works. And that was a day where there was 63 trials already out there on pre print Service and published. 40 of them were published, like 29 of them were randomized controlled trials. And he's literally going out on national television telling not only the country but the entire world that there's no clinical evidence for ivermectin, one of the safest medicines in history that could have saved millions. And I'm just trying to be as honest and as fact based as I can. That was the truth and that's what he did. And I'm not surprised he's found in contempt today.
- [61:58]
C
Yeah, I mean, but I don't think that's a, you know, I think the odds of consequences coming his way in this lifetime are low.
- [62:07]
A
I agree.
- [62:08]
C
Sadly. Okay, well, I want to. One more question I want to ask, because you've all been so generous with your time is again, as a patient, we can know that there are doctors like you who are trying to get the attention of these medicines and you're getting brick wall after brick wall. But if we become sick and we want to tell our doctors, I would like to do this, There, there is no platform for us to insist. Right. And so we again are at the mercy of a corrupt system. There's, there's really nothing we can do except shop for doctors who are willing to listen to people like you. Right.
- [62:48]
A
I, I agree and I think so. Let me give you an example. What I. My goal and I think Paul, it was Paul's goal as well. When we started it with our non profit and we started putting up protocols is we wanted to help people. The government was not providing guidance. They did not have a protocol till far, far into the pandemic. They had remdesivir for the hospital and then nothing else. For at least a year and a half we were putting out simple, safe protocols built on nutraceuticals, sometimes a prescription med that at the time a doctor could freely prescribe. And since nothing since it was an emergency, a lot of doctors were willing to prescribe because there was Nothing else. You can't just do nothing. So the challenge is, what we wanted is my dream was to have Ivermectin in the cupboard of every household in America. And that didn't happen right from the war that we've kind of shared with you and I wrote my whole book about. But I do think there's still something to be said for having certain things in your cupboard and what I call umbrella therapies, the therapy that we shall not name on this show. And then there's that you can find on Rumble on dmso.
- [63:56]
B
Right.
- [63:56]
A
So DMSO is actually FDA approved for one indication. But there are therapies that treat a broad set of diseases that are very simple, safe, easy to use, that cost $30 on Amazon. And there's no reason why people shouldn't have an emergency kit of these medicines or certain therapies that can get you through viral syndromes and other things. And I really think that we really do at this point. What's happened with society and with the immense power and how it's being exerted to control these markets, particularly the pharmaceutical industry, we have to fend for ourselves. And I do think that you need to educate yourself and you need to learn about these therapies and hopefully you'll be able to come with solutions. Because you're right, going to your doctor, asking them for a screen for this or that, if it's not in the guidelines, they're not going to give it to you.
- [64:50]
C
Yeah, I actually told my mother lives in Idaho, which is one of the seven states that allows it to be sold at a pharmacy without a prescription. But I called her local pharmacy and they're like, no, we don't have that. There's one on this street, you know. But no, it's not FDA approved, so we're not carrying it. It was just the Walgreens and I, you know, got cranky and hung up. But it's just not as easy as all that. What were you going to say, Dr. Merrick?
- [65:17]
B
So, first of all, it is FDA approved. It's just being used off label. So they're talking nonsense. What I was going to say is patients need to become empowered to take control and do whatever they can to avoid going to the hospital. So there are lots of things they can do at home. As Pierre said, you need a cabinet of stuff at home, which includes Ivermectin and so that you can avoid going to hospital. Because I think the hospital is a dangerous place for sick people. And that's a terrible indictment of our system. But patients have to be empowered. You have to. You have to do what you can do to stay as healthy as you can and avoid going to the hospital.
- [66:00]
C
Yes. Well, thank you so much, gentlemen, for your time. I, like I said, was reading your work, and then I came across the bit about intravenous vitamin C, and I was like, what? What? How, you know, you have to dig for stuff like this if you're just a regular consumer of information.
- [66:18]
A
Natalie, it was so cool that you picked up on that and asked us to come on, so I thank you. This is. It's an important story, and I don't know whether it'll make a difference, but hopefully there's some doctors out there who, you know, like we talked about before, if a family member comes, they hear us, and they look into to, you know, the real data, and if a family member comes to them and says, please, would you give my loved one IV vitamin C, maybe they're willing to take this, you know, take this to the mat and fight the pharmacist.
- [66:50]
C
Right. You also mentioned that melatonin is a curative for Covid. What the hell? Because during the pandemic, there were all kinds of articles about how melatonin is dangerous. But I've taken up enough that of your time, so maybe we'll talk about melatonin another time.
- [67:05]
A
That Paul's the Melatonin man. He is like, the world expert on melatonin.
- [67:09]
C
Okay, well, if you'll come back and tell me that story, then. How about that?
- [67:13]
A
Anytime.
- [67:14]
C
Okay. Thank you, gentlemen.
- [67:16]
B
Thank you.
- [67:16]
A
Thanks, Stanley. Appreciate it.