Posted originally on TrialSite News by doctrumpet on January 23, 2022

Note that views expressed in this opinion article are the writer’s personal views and not necessarily those of TrialSite.

by Michael Goodkin

Dear John,

I hope things with you and the kids are good. Our Zoom meeting with my COVID expert friend and your associates in your law firm 6 months ago was very interesting. He explained the fraud going on multiple fronts that is going on and the failure of the press to report it in large part due to the Trusted News Initiative. It has very likely resulted in millions of unnecessary deaths worldwide, innumerable unnecessary hospitalizations, untold economic damage and led to governments instituting insane lockdown policies and mandatory vaccination.

I’m sorry you didn’t feel there was a strategy you could pursue at that time. You seemed most interested in liability for the hospitals who denied ivermectin to patients who subsequently died.  There will be strong legal strategies in the future. I have now written eight (8) articles on repurposed drugs for Trialsite News plus serve on the advisory committee.Subscribe to the Trialsitenews “Coronavirus” ChannelNo spam – we promise

Peter McCullough, Dr. Robert Malone and several others could be expert witnesses for you in the future if they feel there is a strong case. Dr. Malone, a key early pioneer involved with the emergence of mRNA technology, served as a respectable virologist and government drug development insider. Today he led  a group in Washington to fight for truth and medical freedom. He has 17,000 physicians and researchers who have signed a petition.

Hospital systems continue to refuse to give patients ivermectin when families request it. The patients who win in court usually live. Those who lose in court almost always die. I doubt that there will ever be a large enough study to prove that treating that type of patient with ivermectin works but other data exists as to its benefit as in Uttar Pradesh, India, 240 million where ivermectin has crushed COVID and Brazil where in a town of 223,000, 160,000 were randomized to ivermectin prevention or no treatment. Those who got a low dose of ivermectin about 4 times a month were 44% less likely to get infected, 56% less likely to be hospitalized and 70% less likely to die. The unvaccinated could certainly be helped by ivermectin prevention. Unfortunately, data like this, called observational data, is discounted by those in power in favor of randomized trial data which is at the mercy of the biases of those conducting the studies.

There are four large, randomized trials of ivermectin, all of which gave or are giving one third or less of the proper dose of ivermectin for early treatment of the delta variant. The results of the Together Trial were announced 8/6 as showing “absolutely no benefit” but the actual data showed a borderline statistically significant 9% decrease in admissions and 18% decrease in mortality.

Dr. Edward Mills, affiliated with a program that has received some Bill Gates funding, ran that trial. NIH chose not to study ivermectin until their ACTIV-6 trial started enrolling patients the same time as the Together results were announced.  They decided to go ahead and give patients a lower dose than in Together where ivermectin showed borderline results. By then we had 80% delta. Dr. Pierre Kory found out that delta needed a much higher dose of ivermectin and put it on the FLCCC Alliance website. I made the ACTIV-6 principal investigator and others involved aware of their dosing snafu on 10/18. My email was acknowledged by NIAID deputy director Dr. Cliff Lane who said it would be addressed by the appropriate people. There was a rumor that they considered adding a new arm with appropriate dosing, but they did nothing.

ACTIV-6’s ivermectin data should be ready in about 2 months. Should ivermectin show no benefit they may or may not publicly admit that it was underdosed and it needs a new trial. If they don’t acknowledge it, someone will call out NIH for randomizing patients to placebo or a dose they knew was unlikely to work then doing nothing when they were made aware of their dosing error. An unacceptable ethical failing. I don’t think the principal investigator, Dr. Susanna Naggie from Duke, wants her career ruined.

Meanwhile the COVID-OUT data will come out very soon. They were 3 months into their trial when Together was announced and 5 months into it and 75% subscribed before they knew of the new FLCCC recommendations. They had no more money, something ACTIV-6 can’t claim. Many patients in Brazil in Together had a nasty gamma variant and ivermectin was sold over the counter there so their trial could turn out positive despite using a similar dose. COVID-OUT has alpha, delta, and omicron patients. First, I hope that their study will show positive results. Next, I hope they will admit that the study was underdosed for delta and that patients probably would have done better with a higher dose. It will be interesting what NIH will do if their study is positive. An EUA is unlikely.

I doubt hospital systems will be vulnerable as their position is that the FDA recommends against ivermectin. Despite there being no evidence of toxicity and hospitals not having restricted doctors choices previously, it will be hard to win. Even if you prove the FDA was wrong, you will have to prove that the hospitals  should have known the FDA was wrong. Hospitals have greatly benefitted from COVID financially. They are paid extra for the patients, extra if the patients die and extra for giving them remdesivir which is a lousy drug. They have a financial disincentive to see early treatment instituted widely which would decrease hospitalizations and have used their clout to punish those physicians who speak out against mandates and suppression of early therapies. ENT doctor Mary Bowden was suspended by Houston Methodist for publicly speaking out against vaccine mandates and giving  her 2000 COVID patients successful early treatment. She is suing them to among other things find out about their finances during COVID.   

A better target is pharmacists who will not stock or sell ivermectin. The few who do sell it charge exorbitant prices. They know there is no data showing that pharmacists selling ivermectin have toxicity. They will claim that the FDA recommends against it, and they are doing it to protect the public. These are the same guys who sold as much oxycontin as they could get. They stopped selling  ivermectin because of their fear of the FDA. If ivermectin shows benefit in COVID-OUT they have no leg to stand on. If they still fail to stock and sell it, they will be a target for you. I will keep you informed.

The Wall Street Journal did an article 12/28 in which it chastised the government for not getting fluvoxamine to the public. It’s a generic SSRI. In the Together Trial, the results of which were announced 8/6 and published in The Lancet Global Health 10/27, in 1497 patients, in those who finished the trial, it lowered admissions 32% and deaths 91%. In addition, the sponsor, Steve Kirsch, reported that no one treated with it gets long COVID which is about 20% of those infected.

NIH says the data is insufficient to use a $1 a day drug with 30 years of safety data. Meanwhile Merck’s molnupiravir which may be dangerous and had similar data got emergency use authorization. Dr. Boulware who has done a video for TrialSite News on repurposed drugs, filed an emergency use application for fluvoxamine 12/21 which the FDA which has ignored,

He is running COVID-OUT testing ivermectin and fluvoxamine. Tom Avril of the Philadelphia Inquirer at my request did an article on fluvoxamine Friday.  I’m hoping  Tom will be doing more articles about repurposed drugs. Many newspapers declined to report on it even though it would have helped a lot of people, especially the unvaccinated.

The next drug to go public will be famotidine (Pepcid). A 56 patient randomized trial of famotidine 80 mg 3 times a day vs. placebo will be published in a major journal very soon showing great benefit. There was plenty of reason for NIH to have sponsored a large trial over a year ago. Famotidine blocks H2 receptors on mast cells which normally cause allergies by releasing histamine. The president and head of research for the big allergy/immunology group, AAAAI, 7000 allergists, were very excited about it. They sent my email to the coronavirus task force. 3 weeks later they suddenly turned cold and did nothing. I suspect the worst.

At some point we will have the data to support a claim that the government intentionally unreasonably failed to give emergency use authorization to fluvoxamine, failed to study then sabotaged the study of famotidine and failed to study ivermectin until August 2021 then did everything possible to sabotage it. The government appeared to have sabotaged hydroxychloroquine, but it will be harder to prove. The reason for the government’s actions is because the success of repurposed drugs would have increased vaccine hesitancy and possibly make vaccines unnecessary. Around the world where vaccines are unavailable, repurposed drugs would have made a tremendous difference. Getting damages from the government will be difficult but it could be a fee for service or even a pro bono case for the benefit of COVID infected people all over the world.

The people I deal with only care about getting proper treatment for patients. A bonus would be to get rid of Fauci and assorted dangerous bureaucrats that say they’re pro-public health, yet their behavior indicates something altogether to the contrary.  The public strongly disapproves of the vaccine mandates and associated haphazard public health by bureaucratic impulse,  but Fauci’s irrational exuberance for his own top-down, hubris-driven program will crush the Democrats for many years when it’s exposed.

The press and social media have conspired with the government and drug companies, culminating in the Trusted News Initiative, to censor information different from the party line.  I would think as attorneys you would find the suppression of information by those in power that would greatly decrease tremendous human suffering would be reprehensible and you would want to fight against it.

Think carefully about the true risk-benefit analysis associated with vaccination prior to subjecting your children to the regimen. The risk from COVID for healthy children is very low. Their risk from the vaccine appears to be higher.  That’s why in the Nordic nations for example holds were placed on the Moderna vaccine for young people under 30.

While industry and public health authorities deny this reality, I put forth here that vaccines spread through your body and induce one’s cells to produce spike protein which is not the same as the one the virus has. The spike protein is toxic. So are the lipid nanoparticles used to deliver it. Insurance companies are reporting a 40% increase in all-cause mortality in 2021 for those 18-64 years old. One in 2700 young men is reported to get myocarditis which can shorten their life.  I suspect that if a troponin blood test were done on every patient, that number would be a lot higher.

There have been hundreds of young athletes who died suddenly, far more than in the past. I’m sure the increase in all-cause mortality is multifactorial but I believe that sooner or later some of it will be attributed directly  to the vaccines. 79,000 people in Australia have sued the government for damage from the vaccines. Unfortunately, vaccine makers are indemnified in America, but their executives could face criminal prosecution in the future.

The CDC has said that vaccine induced immunity was better than immunity from natural infection, but most data suggests the opposite. Wednesday the CDC admitted that since the delta variant, natural immunity is significantly better. The mandates which include mandating vaccination of the 50% of the country previously infected whose immunity is better than those who are vaccinated are absurd. The NIH/Biden logic is that if 100% of the country is vaccinated. we will have herd immunity. It is true that if 100% were vaccinated, fewer would be in the hospital and the vaccinated would be less likely to be infected by the unvaccinated but with these vaccines, the vaccinated people will always spread the virus to each other.

The Biden/NIH logic further goes that the only way to make sure that there is no one left unvaccinated is to vaccinate everyone whether they need it or not. Asking people for proof of previous infection has not been considered.  Vaccines have toxicity as evidenced, despite denials by the government,  by the 900,000 reports on VAERS, the vaccine adverse event reporting system which is a gross underestimate of the problems caused by the vaccines. Many people who have had COVID fret that exposure to the vaccine only gives them risk and not surprisingly resist.  Drug companies and the government are pushing the idea of needing a new shot every 3-4 months for life. It’s not working in Israel. No one has any idea what problems lifelong shots would cause.   After All this has never been studied. What happened to the Declaration of Helsinki and good clinical practices?

I just watched Alex Witt and a guest on MSNBC covering Stop the Mandates in Washington DC. I hate Trump and love MSNBC during the election but every word they said today was false. She knows no science and sounds like a Fauci/Biden/ lobbyist. Her expert sounded like he worked for Pfizer. CNN wasn’t as bad but said the rally was about people who don’t trust the government. I’m not sure the press will ever tell people the truth about repurposed drugs even if it is conclusively shown that the government healthcare agencies deliberately tanked repurposed drugs that would have saved hundreds of thousands of lives. I know your law firm has mostly Democrats. I hope that if I come to you with a strong, profitable case that will benefit COVID patients but hurt those that have seemingly conspired to thwart economically repurposed drugs at every turn, your law firm will be willing to take it on.  Life is too short not to do the right thing.