Someone might want to check the water at Buckingham Palace. The Royals are experiencing a sudden spate of cancers. King Charles, the Duchess of York, and the Duchess of Wales are dealing with what can’t possibly be jab-related turbo-cancers, so here’s another question we’re not supposed to ask.
Has anyone suggested Ivermectin?
The timing couldn’t be better. The FDA and plaintiffs (RobertL. Apter; Mary Talley Bowden; and Paul E. Marik) have settled with the FDA over that horsepaste nonsense that led to a systemic rejection of Ivermectin as not just a safe human drug (which it was long before COVID or Long COVID) but as something doctors had a hard time prescribing to patients. The FDA does not have to admit wrongdoing, but it has agreed to,
Retire FDA’s Consumer Update entitled, Why You Should Not UseIvermectin to Treator Prevent COVID-19, originally posted on March 5, 2021, and revised on September 7, 2021 (ECF No. 12, Ex. 1), while retaining the right to post a revised Consumer Update.
Delete and not republish (1) FDA’s Twitter, LinkedIn, and Facebook posts from August 21, 2021(ECF No. 12, Exs. 4,5), that read, “You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Seriously, y’all. Stop it.”; (2) FDA’sInstagram post from August 21, 2021 (ECF No. 12, Ex. 6), that reads, “You are not a horse. Stop it with the #ivermectin. It’s not authorized for treating #COVID.”; (3) FDA’s Twitter post from April 26, 2022 (ECFNo. 12, Ex. 7), that reads, “Hold your horses, y’all. Ivermectin may be trending, but it still isn’t authorized or approved to treat COVID-19.”; and (4) all other social media posts on FDA accounts that link to Why You Should Not Use Ivermectin to Treat or Prevent COVID-19(ECF No. 12, Ex. 1).
Amid all the hubbub about horse paste, gobs of studies since that have demonstrated that Ivermectin is safe and more effective at treating COVID than any of the mRNA therapies (and masks, distancing, and lockdowns combined), other benefits have managed escape velocity. Ivermectin has shown signs that it suppresses tumor growth in some cancers (2020). And in this study published in 2021. There are others, but the gist is this: Ivermectin is an antiparasitic wonder drug with wide-ranging potential to improve or save lives.
Can we assume that the Royal physicians are using global guidance (Ivermectin is widely available outside the US and saved many in Africa), or are they trapped in the western Pfizer media mill and view the stuff as akin to applying leeches? Related: Irony Alert: The FDA Issues a Warning about Misinformation on the Internet
We don’t know. Kate’s getting Chemo, they say, while King Charles appears poised for an unpleasantly short reign (which, given his age and not being named Elizabeth, seems preordained). Assuming he doesn’t get turbo cancer, William could find himself crowned young enough to last a few decades or at least until Netflix replaces him with a person of color.
As for Ivermectin, the FDA isn’t doing more than taking down its gang colors. They are not admitting wrongdoing (or that you were right) and continue to argue that they never told anyone they could not prescribe or use Ivermectin. Nor are they suggesting they even have that authority, but then they never had the authority to issue EUA approval for Pfizer or Moderna given that Ivermectin and Hydroxychlorqhine, both FDA-approved, were on the market in human doses, very inexpensive, widely available, and more than capable treatments … as well a for some forms of cancer.
If you are the sort to assume unpleasant agendas, then The Jab to Side-Effects to Turbo-Caners Triad is not beyond the realm of possibility. That they knew or suspected, which, if true, means they should be coming out against Ivermectin to treat cancers in 3…2…1…
