Must-See Confrontation Of Top Scientist Who Hid Truth About Ivermectin

(Republican Insider) – Back in January of 2021, Dr. Andrew Hill of the University of Liverpool published a highly influential pre-print paper and in it stated this conclusion, “Ivermectin should be validated in larger appropriately controlled randomized trials before the results are sufficient for review by regulatory authorities.”

The only problem was that in his meta-analysis for the World Health Organization and other leading health agencies in regards to the effectiveness of the repurposed drug in treating COVID, he actually found that Ivermectin reduced hospitalizations by 80%.

When the world was seeing 15,000 deaths per day from COVID, Dr. Hill discovered Ivermectin could actually save lives and prevent people from ending up in the hospital.

So, why didn’t he come to that conclusion at the end of his paper?

The world took note of his about-face with many demanding an explanation. A colleague of Hill’s, Dr. Tess Lawrie, confronted him during a Zoom video call that was recorded and featured in a short documentary produced by Oracle Films.

Lawrie, the director of the Evidence-Based Medicine Consultancy at the University of the Witwatersrand in Bath, England, was able to get Hill to admit to changing his conclusion on Ivermectin because of pressure from his non-profit sponsors, UNITAID.

UNITAID professes to be a “global health agency” and is funded by vaccine promoters such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, which promised $120 million to a Merck drug called molnupiravir, an expensive alternative to Ivermectin.

Interestingly, some medical scientists have warned that the genotoxic molnupiravir could cause viral mutants and actually make the pandemic worse. (Sometimes it does seem as though Bill Gates delights in the idea of a truly deadly pandemic).

“I think I’m in a very sensitive position here,” Hill told Lawrie.

She replied, “Lots of people are in sensitive positions; they’re in hospital, in ICUs dying, and they need this medicine.”

As it turns out, the University of Liverpool received $40 million from UNITAID just four days before Hill was set to publish his study.

“You’re not seeing people dying every day. And this medicine prevents deaths by 80%. So, 80% of those people who are dying today don’t need to die because there’s Ivermectin.”

Hill argued that the National Institutes of Health would not agree to recommend Ivermectin.

“Yeah, because the NIH is owned by the vaccine lobby,” Lawrie replied.

“This is bad research. So at this point, I am really, really worried about you,” she said.

“OK,” Hill said, clearly appearing to be uncomfortable. “Yeah. I mean, it’s a difficult situation.”

“No, you might be in a difficult situation. I’m not because I have no paymaster,” Lawrie asserted. “So, how long are you going to let people carry on dying unnecessarily — up to you? What is the timeline you’ve allowed for this, then?”

Hill explained that the study needs to go to the WHO, NIH, the FDA and the European Medicines Agency, adding, “And they’ve got to decide when they think enough is enough.”

Hill dropped the truth of the entire pandemic right there in a nutshell. When the powers that be decide enough is enough, it will be over. This is already happening. With the 2022 midterm elections right around the corner, it has been decided that COVID is probably going to be bad for Democrats so now COVID has to be shelved. Just for now anyway, until 2024 at least.

Lawrie went on to emphasize the importance of timely action on Hill’s part.

“You’d rather… risk loads of people’s lives?” she asked.

“Do you know if you and I stood together on this, we could present a united front and we could get this thing. We could make it happen,” Lawrie said. “We could save lives; we could prevent people from getting infected. We could prevent the elderly from dying.”

She said that as a doctor, she is “going to save as many lives as I can.”

“And I’m going to do that through getting the message [out] on Ivermectin.”

But “your work is going to impair that,” Lawrie told Hill.

“You seem to be able to bear the burden of many, many deaths, which I cannot do,” she said.

Lawrie wanted Hill to identify the UNITAID author who changed his conclusions.

“Well, it’s just the people there,” Hill began. “I don’t…”

Lawrie pressed further.

“Could you please give me a name of someone in UNITAID I could speak to, so that I can share my evidence and hope to try and persuade them to understand it?”

Hill said he would have to think about it.

“But, I mean, this is very difficult, because I’m, you know, I’ve got this role where I’m supposed to produce this paper and we’re in a very difficult, delicate balance,” he said.”… Yeah, it’s a very strong lobby.”

Hill promised he would need about six weeks to resolve the stalemate and get Ivermectin approved.

“How many people die every day?” Lawrie asked.

“Oh, sure. I mean, you know, 15,000 people a day,” he replied.

“Fifteen thousand people a day times six weeks,” Lawrie said.

She noted that every other country was getting Ivermectin, except for the U.K. and the United States, “because the U.K. and the USA and Europe are owned by the vaccine lobby.”

“My goal is to get the drug approved and to do everything I can to get it approved so that it reaches the maximum,” Hill vowed.

In conclusion, Lawrie slammed Hill, saying, “You’re not doing everything you can, because everything you can would involve saying to those people who are paying you: ‘I can see this prevents deaths. So I’m not going to support this conclusion anymore, and I’m going to tell the truth.'”

She told Hill he would not get Ivermectin approved because of the way his conclusion is written.

“You’ve actually shot yourself in the foot, and you’ve shot us all in the foot,” she said. “All of… everybody trying to do something good. You have actually completely destroyed it.

“I don’t know how you sleep at night, honestly,” Lawrie asserted.

Lawrie is cofounder of the BIRD panel, an international group of actual experts (not the so-called experts the left would have to “follow”) dedicated to the transparent and accurate scientific research of Ivermectin.

On April 24, 2021, she convened the International Ivermectin for COVID Conference, the Desert Review reported, during which she called for reform of the drug approval process.

“They who design the trials and control the data also control the outcome,” she said. “So, this system of industry-led trials needs to be put to an end. Data from ongoing and future trials of novel COVID treatments must be independently controlled and analyzed. Anything less than total transparency cannot be trusted.”

Lawrie said the story of Ivermectin “has highlighted that we are at a remarkable juncture in medical history.”

“The tools that we use to heal and our connection with our patients are being systematically undermined by relentless disinformation stemming from corporate greed,” she said. “The story of Ivermectin shows that we as a public have misplaced our trust in the authorities and have underestimated the extent to which money and power corrupts.”

Lawrie said that had Ivermectin being fully deployed in 2020 “when medical colleagues around the world first alerted the authorities to its efficacy, millions of lives could have been saved, and the pandemic with all its associated suffering and loss brought to a rapid and timely end.”

Referring to the COVID-19 vaccines, Lawrie charged that “hundreds of millions of people have been involved in the largest medical experiment in human history.”

“Mass vaccination was an unproven novel therapy. Hundreds of billions will be made by Big Pharma and paid for by the public,” she said. “With politicians and other nonmedical individuals dictating to us what we are allowed to prescribe to the ill, we as doctors, have been put in a position such that our ability to uphold the Hippocratic oath is under attack.”

Lawrie proposed that physicians form a new World Health Organization that represents the interests of the people.

“Never before has our role as doctors been so important,” she concluded, “because never before have we become complicit in causing so much harm.”

We need more doctors and medical scientists like Lawrie who are not afraid to stand up for the truth and who are not bought, paid for, and corrupted by Big Pharma.

Copyright 2022.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here