Dr. Paul Marik, Chairman of Frontline Critical Care Alliance, on COVID Lies

1 year ago

Doug talks to Dr. Paul Marik, world renowned doctor and chairman of Frontline Critical Care Alliance.

Doug Truax: Welcome to the First Right podcast, a weekly conservative news show brought to you by Restoration of America. I'm your host, Doug Truax, founder, and president of Restoration of America. Today We were blessed once again to have a courageous doctor who refused to buckle to the lies about COVID told by the medical, pharmaceutical and media establishments in America. Dr. Paul Mark is one of the top doctors in the world, particularly when it comes to ICU treatment. He figured out early on that the way we were treating COVID patients was all wrong and he hasn't stopped telling the true since. Well, welcome to the show, Dr. Marik.

Dr. Paul Marik: Thank you. It's a pleasure to be here.

Doug Truax: All right. Great. Well, so before we get into your COVID story, we would like for you to give our audience an overview of your distinguished career before the pandemic hit.

Dr. Paul Marik: Yes, very distinguished. Yes. So I did my medical school training in South Africa, I entered a residency and some critical care training. I then did a critical care fellowship in London, Ontario, Canada. And then after I came to the U S and I was in academic medicine for close to 30 years at teaching hospitals. And that's what I was doing till the pandemic arrived. Unfortunately, you know, due to circumstances, which we can talk about, you know, I, I didn't follow the narrative. I refuse to follow the narrative. And basically that ended my career.

Doug Truax: Yeah. So let's get into the specifics on that. So when, when everything got going and, and, and you saw how they were recommending covid be treated well, what did you see different that you're like, wait a minute, let's do something. Let's do something different that's actually going to work.

Dr. Paul Marik: Yeah. So, I mean, it's a good question. So this started in March of 2020, you know, when COVID arrived on the Eastern shore and maybe on the west coast. So we were getting ready for it. And at that time, the treatment from the NIH, the CDC the WH was supportive care, and what supportive care means is essentially no care, which is completely absurd. You know, we knew that in New York, the mortality, you know, in the ICU was 80%. So, you know what disease is there that physicians will say, Hey, I'm not going to treat this. I'm just going to do nothing. It's an absurdity. So what we did is we put together a treatment protocol for COVID. If you hospitalized patients, there was based on clinical observations, based published data and information that we knew. So we put together a treatment protocol, which at that time included corticosteroids, because we knew there was significant inflammation and included anticoagulation because we knew these patients had clotting problems. And, you know, we were ridiculed at bedtime and people said, you can't use corticosteroids. It's malpractice, you know, six months later down the road, obviously a study came out, which showed corticosteroids, saved people's lives. So, you know, it validated what we were doing. And then our protocol evolved with time. We then obviously recognize that the goal really is to keep patients out of the hospital. Once they get to the hospital, they're ready, you know, us critically ill, they, their chances of doing of surviving are not good, have lots of problems. So we then developed an early outpatient treatment protocol, which rarely is, is the essence of controlling this pandemic. So there are a whole host of drugs, you know, it's not just ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, but there must be 20 or 30 drugs, medications, nutraceuticals that have actually been shown scientifically proven to have a great impact in the early treatment of COVID yet to this day, early treatment has been ignored by the state agencies who the powers that be that the, that the mantra of the NIH was, you know, there's no treatment stay at home until you can't breathe. When you get blue and concrete and Gato hospital, which again is completely absurd. You know, they're all really effective treatments. And, you know, we strongly believe that the way to have controlled this pandemic was early treatment. What that would have done is it would have prevented progression. People go to hospital, it would have prevented spread of the disease. And in fact, the likelihood is a whatever eliminated this disease. If there had been widespread use of early medical therapy, we probably would have eliminated this disease. And we wouldn't be in the place we are now. And there is epidemiological data to support that, that concept. There's a large province in India called Uttar Pradesh. They did a very broad wide seek and treat program using ivermectin, and they managed to eliminate COVID. So it really was the key to solving this problem, but obviously the powers that be did not, you know, that was not part of their agenda because then it would have, you know, made the vaccination protocol or program or incentive null and void, and obviously the goal, their goal, and their stated goal. And I don't think there's any question of the Baptist is that their goal was a vaccine and every arm, whether it was safe and effective was irrelevant. And they were going to do everything make, could to prevent early treatment, basically to, to validate, to make people scared and to provide what they, you know, the only option people had for control of this disease. And we obviously know that that has not happened, you know, despite the lockdowns, the masks, social distancing and the vaccination, you know, the disease is still uncontrolled. The cases are rising, BA five is out of control, right? And if you remember going back, you know, what they said is, you know, we need to vaccinate you once we have 70% of people vaccinated, we'll have herd immunity and the disease will go away. And obviously I was completely false.

Doug Truax: Right? Absolutely so much has been wrong. And I want to go back to something you said a second ago, you're talking about the NIH, not not looking at the evidence. So you have like the, the province in India or the state in India, all this data's coming in, you're you and your team, you're presenting your data. It builds and it builds, but the NIH and the medical establishment is just like, don't want to see it. So what you're saying though, to go back to what you said, they had already know no matter what they had bought into the vaccine thing. So they're not even a look at new data as it comes in, or is it, is there a, what's your opinion of the motivation of them at that moment? Do you have one? What, what's the deal with that?

Dr. Paul Marik: It was just inconvenient science for them with inconvenient truth. So for multiple reasons, they did not want to look at the data. They just, they disparaged the data, they dismissed the data. Firstly, the EUA for all these experimental therapies, including the vaccine. If you look at the FDA rules and regulations is pretty catered on the fact, there's no effect of alternative therapy. And when they sign the EOA, they have to basically say, we, you know, we have an easy way because there's no other alternative therapy. If they accepted hydroxy, chloroquine or ivermectin as a reasonable effective therapy, it really have made the EOS completely now null and void legally and you know, would have stopped this billion dollar industry. So they went out of their way to disparage the data, ignore the data. And indeed, you know, what they did, which is unconscionable, especially with four hydroxy, chloroquine is they designed clinical studies that were designed to fail. I mean, it's an outrageous thing that they would actually expose people to the risk of a study where the study was designed to fail. So what they did with hydroxychloroquine firstly is the studies used it in the late hospital phase. And we know it doesn't work at that time. The virus has stopped replicating. It works in the early phase. The men, what they did is they used a toxic dose. So the normal dose is 200 to 400 milligrams a day. They use the dose of 2,800 milligrams. And unlike ivermectin hydroxychloroquine has a much narrow therapeutic index. So what actually happened, the actually killed patients because they use such a high toxic dose. And then obviously they say, see, it doesn't work, but that's scientific misconduct. It's actually immoral illegal. And as I understand in a part of the study was done in Brazil. And the attorney general in Brazil, I think is going to, is late charges against these scientists for manslaughter because the study actually killed people, but they did it intentionally.

Doug Truax: Unbelievable. So I've always been trying to figure this out. So you have decision makers and NIH, are they, you know, are they being, are they being paid off by pharmaceutical companies? I'm trying to figure out how, how, why is that happening that way? I D I not coming up with anything else. And, and then I give, well, the only thing I might add in there potentially is governmental hubris. You know, we can, we can solve any problem now here at the government. So we're going to come up with, forget about the easy stuff that's ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine or therapeutics. We're so smart. We're going to come up with this vaccine and it's all going to be great. And along the way, the pharmaceutical guys are gonna love us. They're gonna, we're all gonna be in bed together and keep moving it along. I mean, is it something like that in your opinion? Or is there any,

Dr. Paul Marik: So, you know what I mean, unfortunately, COVID has shun a bright light on what's been going on with this agencies and big pharma. So w w we know it's an unfortunate statement that I'm going to say, but it is actually the truth is the agencies are captured. They, they are controlled by big pharma and this Pharmaca industrial complex, the FDA and the CDC and NIH, they do not work for the American population. They do not work for the benefit of Americans. They work for big pharma. And there's absolutely no question of doubt about it. Many of them have worked for big pharma. There's this room revolving door. They're absolutely controlled by big pharma, big pharma, you know, supports the FDA. And there's no question of doubt. I mean, it's, it's, it's so obvious and clear to anyone who looks that, you know, the big pharma control the FDA, and you just have to look at the fact that the FDA was prepared to bury the Pfizer data for 75 years.
Right. But seventy-five years now. W why would you do such a thing unless you want to hide the data, right. And the FDA where work conspirators in this plot, and you know what I discovered, you know, this has been shocking and it's, it's opened up a whole can of worms that I really was not aware of is that, you know, when a scientific journal publishes the data of a steady, they never given access to the actual data. They never see the data. The, the, the company writes the study, they provide the data and the peer review is, assume the data's correct. And obviously often it's not correct. The FDA has access to the data, but they will not make it available. And we know now definitively categorically and undeniably that the studies that Pfizer did, they cheated, they cooked the data that misrepresented the data that manipulated the data. And we know this now from the freedom of information act that the judge said, no, you can't bury this to 75 years. So the data's now coming out. And, you know, and apart from that, there is a whistleblower who worked for Pfizer. Who's now suing Pfizer, I think for a trillion dollars, a trillion dollars, because she was involved in the Pfizer study and she was witnessed to them, manipulating the data, unblinding the patients, dismissing data, and basically covering up their, their side effects complications. So, you know, what, what what's published in the medical journals is just not true. And just to make it even worse, the, you know, the editor of new England journal and Lancet, who, you know, they have the most premiere journals who, you know, I used to look up in awe as the, the, the pinnacle of science have publicly admitted that pharmaceutical companies are so powerful and so influential. They actually forced to publish papers that they otherwise wouldn't publish. It's a, it's a, it's a remarkable admission. And obviously that profit from this, because what they do is they have a relationship with big pharma, big pharma, won't buy reprints of the papers and it at a high cost. So there's a financial incentive for the journals to go along with this scientific misconduct. And, you know, you look at the Pfizer study, you know, we know, I mean, there's no question that it was, they did not publish the truth. You know, we know this from the whistleblower. We know this from the leak data, for example, in the first 90 days after release of the buys, the vaccine. So this is until February of 2021 Pfizer, we're aware of over 1200 deaths, 1200 deaths, and over 40,000 serious adverse events related to the vaccine directly related to the backseat. So at that time, the whole program should have been shut down. You, we talking about February 21, the data was so overwhelming at that time as to the serious adverse events, it should have been shut down, but the data was hidden and the FDA and the CDC just turned a blind eye.

Doug Truax: Well, let me ask you about the percentages on this, just so I understand, cause I'm with you, they should've shut it down. I just saw Dr. Fauci in an interview. He's now talking in a way relative to these adverse effects. It's like, well, we had to make decisions about the bigger, the greater good versus some damage. And I feel like where they're headed here is, well, so many people got the vaccine that there's going to be the absolute number of people that have an adverse effect is going to be higher than you might want, but that's, that's just comes with the territory. So can you talk to that a little bit? I totally am with you, they're hiding the adverse effects and the damages of the vaccine, but how does that play out when you have all these people take it and you do have these adverse effects. Well, how do the numbers shake out relative to the people who took it and the amount of folks that have the adverse effect?

Dr. Paul Marik: Yeah, so I, I saw that press release and I was sick to the core because the fact that he could, so blatantly lie is truly astonishing. So they're multiple sources of data that, that indicate the profound effect and the profound toxicity of these vaccines. They're not safe. So firstly, if you look at the vaers data, which is the vaccine adverse event reporting system run by the end of the department health and human services. So in that database itself, there are something like 20,000 deaths. And if you look at the trend of all the vaccines, you know, in the last 20 years, we're looking at a really low number, suddenly in 2021, there's a massive spike in the number of deaths and adverse events related to vaccination.
You know, there's the yellow card system in, in the UK. And then there's something called VG access, which is run by the who, which is the biggest pharmaco vigilance database in the world. And they track, you know, multiple medications and vaccinations. So if you look at their database and this is run by the who, they currently over 20,000 deaths at 4 million, let me say that again, 4 million serious adverse events against the vaccine. Whereas you look at ivermectin in the same database, which has been used for 25 years in their database. There so-called 18 deaths and 4,000 adverse events. So the absurd paradox is the FDA and NIH and CDC consider ivermectin a dangerous toxic toasty worming medicine, which in 25 years is so-called called 18 desert, which most of those were due to the parasite yet the vaccine, which is safe and effective, according to their own data in 18 months has racked up over 4 million adverse events.
So the, the hypocrisy, the lies, the deceit is truly astonishing. So, you know, we do have some data. So, you know, I mean, you know, if you look at all the other vaccines, there's never, the first of all, this is not a vaccine. You know, this is an experimental genetic experiment. It's never been used before. There's no medical precedent. This is an experimental therapy of which the long-term benefits. We just don't know. It's never been used before. So you, you, the, you know, if you look at the department of defense database, the increased risk of complications, which includes strokes, heart attacks, cancer, miscarriages increased by three to 400%. And this is in the department of defense database. So we have multiple sources of data confirming that something, something is, is wrong. And then we have the, the life insurance data. So, you know, the life insurance company is that they obviously acutely aware of young people buying unexpectedly and the most recent studies show there's 110% increase in the non COVID deaths of people between the ages of 20 and 60. And this is across the board. So something very irregular is happening.

Doug Truax: Yeah. It's, it's just terrible. Yeah, go ahead.

Dr. Paul Marik: You know, if you look at the Pfizer data, the risk of adverse events is probably 2%, but they, there is a study done by an independent polling company that reported 8.6% of people who vaccinated 8.6 will have a serious adverse event. And there was a study done in the VA looking at adverse events with Madonna and Pfizer. And again, it was 8%. So that is a enormous number of patients. So if you consider the number of people that are vaccinated, you know, maybe, you know, 350 million people we talking about over at, you know, over 10 to 15 million people who are vaccine injured, this is, this is a catastrophic and monumental problem we facing.

Doug Truax: Yeah. It could be the greatest it's. I think it's going to be the greatest medical blunder in the history of the world. And I think that that point you made about it, not being a vaccine is a good one. That was a marketing problem. From the beginning, you start calling this thing a vaccine when it's just a treatment, it's not, you know, the, the connotation began and everybody's my well, it's going to get rid of it. It's going to protect me from that, all these things, it's going to suppress the symptoms and you're still going to carry it around. But all these things were conspiring. It felt like to just like you said, everybody take the shot. You know, the pharmaceutical companies don't have any liability anymore. They got control of the data. The medical journals are using data that they've got control of. And they're pushing it, pushing it out there, no matter what.
And it just feels like this, you know? And you brought up the point about people on the inside of the FDA and NIH, former, former SuiteGL people. It is just it. I think a lot of people need to go to jail. I'm happy to hear about the situation in Brazil, but do you think this is where this is going to land over time, right. More and more is going to come out. It's like, wait a minute. Who said yes to that in spite of this information, and those people are going to be there, there's going to be some criminal charges at some point. Right?

Dr. Paul Marik: So yeah. I mean, you know, the data is overwhelming. You know, if you look for it, you can see the data, you know, obviously there's, this is a crime against humanity, something that's never been perpetrated at this level ever. You know, the problem is the people, the stakeholders now are so deeply involved that they never, they never gonna admit that they made a mistake.

Doug Truax: Right.

Dr. Paul Marik: I don't think they ever gonna admit it. Yeah. So, you know, it's, it's to have to be, you know, legislators maybe with, you know, w when the Congress changes towards the end of the year, maybe people, they are, there are some legislators who know what's going on, who are investigating this, but they are the small minority, because unfortunately, you know, you have to follow the narrative. And, you know, people like Tony Fowchee on not questioned, you know, any alternative point of view is censored. As you know, everything I say gets censored. YouTube takes me down. Facebook takes me down because although I'm absolutely telling the truth, I'm considered a mis informationist. So misinformation is actually the definition is, is anyone who says anything against the narrative it's safe and effective. If you say anything, which questions that you or misinformation is. And if you think about it, science is based on people asking questions. It's based on people having an exchange of ideas. It's about having a conversation. Like we having a conversation and we open and we honest, and we talk about things and that's how we progress. But when you silence everyone, I mean, this is truly astonishing is that science has been decapitated because it's been censored. And only one, one point of view is disseminated. And, you know, they have spent millions and billions of dollars in advertising and the same people that, you know, did the misinformation related to smoking the safety of smoking and promoting smoking it's these same bad players are the ones that are doing this public relations to, you know, provide the misinformation about the vaccines.

Doug Truax: Yeah. It's all about the money. I think at the end of the day, you know, that's what, that's, what's this going to come down to the pharmaceutical companies are way too far into everything and they don't have any liability on this deal. So yeah, they're going to keep censoring.

Dr. Paul Marik: The worst thing is that, you know, by, by, by the regulation set up by the federal government, they have indemnity. So basically they can do what they want to, they have no recourse, and that's what gives them the freedom. I mean, it's truly astonishing. And you know, when people get the vaccine, they sign a consent form, but it's not truly a true consent form because they're not given the true information and any consent form should include, you know, what are the options? What are the alternatives to this therapy? And patients are not told about alternatives, and they're not, they're not told the truth about the adverse events.

Doug Truax: That's right. That's right. Well, you are a great example for how to be a true professional in the medical profession, which we need way more of. I love having folks like you on, because it brings back some faith in the rest of us that are there. Our faith is waning as we've watched all this happen, but I know it's been difficult. We appreciate your boldness and your willingness to tell the truth and your dedication to what you do. You know, we're going to get the word out as best we can. And I do believe they will come a day. Will you be truly vindicated? And because the truth always does come out. So I appreciate you telling me that.

Dr. Paul Marik: Yeah. So I think the bottom line is you can hide the truth for only so long, but the truth will come out and you want to be on the right side of the truth. You want to be on the right side of science and you want to be on the right side of history. And I think these people are, have a lot of accountability to, you know, to, to, to be responsible for, because, you know, the, the, the, the effect that this has had on society, as we all know it has been catastrophic, you know, not only the human suffering, but the social isolation, the effect on the economy, the effect on children, the effect on Kansas be terrible. The horrible childhood has been turned upside down, and that should never have happened.

Doug Truax: That's

Dr. Paul Marik: Right. We should never close the schools. We should never have treated kids the way we treated them.

Doug Truax: Yeah. It's wrong decisions early on. And here we are. So, well, thanks again for all you're doing, and I appreciate you coming on the show. We'll get this out far and wide and make sure your message gets out there and appreciate all you've done.

Dr. Paul Marik: Thanks. And thanks for, thanks for speaking and things for what you're doing. It's, it's, it's, it's, it's helpful that you can have a conversation with somebody who is prepared to, you know, understand and listen. It's somewhat unique.

Doug Truax: Well, we do. We need more of it. We need more people like you for sure. Thanks doctor.

Dr. Paul Marik: Have a good day.

Doug Truax: All right. That's our show for today. Thank you so much for tuning in and for supporting conservative media. Don't forget that by working together and staying diligent, we conservatives can bring our country back to true greatness until next week. Let's all keep praying that God will continue to bless America

First, right? A new kind of new summary without the liberal slant every morning in your inbox. Always free subscribe by texting first, right to 3 0 1 6 1 that's FIRSTRIGHT All caps. One word to 3 0 1 6, 1.

Loading 38 comments...