Joe Rogan Experience #1671 — Bret Weinstein & Dr. Pierre Kory Transcript

Transcript

0:00 the Joe Rogan experience ivermectin. And I'll just say through our early days, it was scary. We didn't know if it was transmitted on surfaces or what. So Heather and I working through the various emerging evidence and figuring out what we believed and what we didn't and why we ran into ivermectin. And there was this indication that it was effective against COVID.

3:23 specialty. In fact, he's the And Ivermectin, the first paper was last about March or April. molecules make it from the bench to the bedside. And so, but it was an emergency, right? It was a said on YouTube led to your channel getting now one strike on one channel and is three strikes Because obviously it can't be everybody now because we have the WHO is now saying that you shouldn't vaccinate children.

6:36 I think it's the CDC. Right. I've also seen recent recommendations that say should not know any more than anybody else knows. The drugs that they favor and the ones that they don't, So meaning, so the WHO- Well, yes, there are studies. So there are studies showing some support, The thing about, one of the things about ivermectin is it's been around so long,

9:24 This becomes part of the issue with highlighting it, right? So YouTube has done a couple things. Spammers, deceivers. But the second one was more specific. It was clearer. And what they said was deceptive medical information. So part of what we should discuss today is what it means for said, the majority of my family's and the evidence is most definitely not with the CDC and the WHO.

13:27 right? So there's three ways that you can transmit a virus, right? One is direct contact surfaces, It took them a year, all of the agencies, to figure out whether it was Insufficient evidence. a definite mode of transmission. large droplets, which only spend a little bit of time in the air, right? And so the air clears and the room filled up with the stuff,

16:14 These were preprints, right? very complex organization. And then they said, I think China's doing a great job. People need to understand that their masks are not going to be perfectly pandemic and the rules are changing and the agreed upon facts are changing. In the beginning of the And now the consensus is it's very possible that it leaked, if not likely, that it leaked from a lab.

20:11 and Colbert's trying to handicap it. right is that all safe to say i think i? I don't know about the particular story at the end of what you just said. keeps this, so to like to stop conversations, it's very dangerous because you might be censoring something that's absolutely 100% true. But see if you find the thing there. do is disinformation. So the science around the lab leak was inconvenient to a lot of people.

23:35 And so the molecular work was done by, or the investigation into it was done by Uri Dagan, my podcast the first time. I can't remember exactly. I think it was around the same time. disinformation. This was a question of actually stigmatizing people who were simply reading the know what they're talking about inherently. That's not to say they never do, but in that case,

26:10 It is an indication that he does not feel like defending himself on Twitter, And you're very careful in the way you say it, which is so infuriating that you're being censored because you will always say the and I assume that's got to be part of it because I think there's no way YouTube And for someone like myself who needs to know that there's people out there that are objectively analyzing this stuff regardless of what the narrative is.

29:18 It's not the opposite of what you do. Scientific consensus is two almost opposite things in this case. Scientific consensus, Consensus that shows up like that in the middle of an emerging pandemic, right, where you've got a brand new pathogen, which we know very little about. I remember going out of the house wearing happens. These consensus, these consenses that we are being handed about how this virus works, what works to fight it, what doesn't work to fight it, what you should do in order to protect yourself, these things are being handed down from on high.

32:22 a lot of people understood that the story they were being told who don't have to answer to their department chair, right, But nonetheless, that's the point is something would like to limit the discussion so that They should pull that stuff. If you're not, we have a real problem because now we're relying only on the organizations Again, when we're talking about you guys, we're not talking about crazy conspiracy theorists that are discussing hollow earth.

36:02 Just kidding. You sure he doesn't have COVID? And sometimes it's blatant the ones who are making sense or like you said transparent with the data analyzing openly expert at the data So it was basic stuff that didn't make sense. look at the independent objective experts, I think you need, because here's the other thing. our organization, we're a nonprofit.

39:02 And I think that makes us a credible source of information, at least I hope so. and I think we've been calling it airborne transmission. and nobody knows what to believe, right? things. And so that's sort of the hallmark of how consensus is properly incoherent. The response pretends that there is no evidence that it works rather than a noisy But in general, very large trials are necessary when you're looking for very small effects, right? What we do have is several meta-analyses.

42:47 Whereas if you do a meta-analysis and you group together a lot of little studies, ivermectin. You take it to prevent getting the disease, right? And this is an anti-parasitic And so the thing that was mentioned earlier, where it was found in cell culture to work, huge portions of the globe in eradicating parasitic diseases. The one called river So it's been shown to be effective against Zika, dengue,

46:39 Brett's being very cautious, which is correct. But as a guy who's been immersed in this data, We all like big randomized controlled trials when you can get them, even though they are Especially with a virus, people get better without it, right? signal out of that, it's much more robust because it corrects for any individual flaws that you'll evidence that they appear to be applying here, I don't think it's defensible in the end, but reasonable people could potentially disagree.

50:14 If you're going to insist that that is the only kind of evidence you will accept before drug comes to market, right? The point is you don't really know how dangerous something is until you've seen it in a large population that has lots of variation in it and has enough time Okay? Okay? All right. This is part of some of the things that I was discussing earlier when I said things

52:50 No worries. even if the opposition wants to say they're low quality and small, which they're not. it's not being recommended. Let's go back to that term I used before. They did this work independently. No one paid them So basically, you'd save two out of every three people that you treated. And I would also, viral syndrome, especially in the context where, I mean, you should be assuming any sort of viral

56:23 and they want to bring up cautions around What they try to do is they're trying to suggest that there is more side effects when you use ivermectin versus placebo. well-tolerated drug. And the last thing I'll say on the safety is a famous French toxicologist Therapeutic advances. There it is. Sentence in the middle. Okay. This might be one of the most

59:02 what it means is that ivermectin alone, if properly utilized, is capable of driving this pathogen to extinction. I was very encouraged by that number. That number again, this is the issue of ivermectin A is prophylaxis. Ivermectin B is treatment. The If you're treating or preventing COVID, you do want it to cross into your blood. And the fact is the molecule is fat soluble. So if you're

1:01:58 trials, right, the ones where you take it weekly, because they had some which you took weekly, Viricidal, meaning can kill, like homicidal, but viricidal means kills viruses, right? So But that's not the thing that's most impressive here because these were frontline workers who were so thoroughly exposed to COVID that 57% of the people in the 400-person control group who didn't take ivermectin did get COVID, right?

1:04:06 ivermectin, and frankly, it isn't just ivermectin, we now have a series of repurposed drugs for which It's not just ivermectin. There shouldn't be. And so I'm taking care of a lot of dying patients and a lot of patients who are near death, always so large. up like this. Randomized, observational, prevention, treatment, early, late. really therapeutics and trials, it goes on Trial Site News. But they've been a really

1:08:27 There's definitions. They looked at things like allocation concealment and randomization and all sorts of these terms You need like massive trials done by big pharma over years. ivermectin adopted worldwide. Ivermectin is seen as an opponent to whatever policies they're trying, and Western Europe. So it's the EMA, which is European Medicines and Aging, which is all of

1:11:10 And I think they're all acting on a different objective. Well, the WHO kind of suggested that it may not be safe. Well, here's the thing. All right. So this is- Down a little bit more. Yeah. know anything about the business side of this. I do know what fiduciary responsibility is. You have a generic, like, what is the expense of ivermectin? That's a problem.

1:16:58 get through the trials. So there's a lot of risk. And so the pharmaceutical industry has engineered Right. So we we we live in a public in a health system which favors for profit medicines over nonprofit. That's who gets attention by the FDA. is the magnitude. If you just simply extrapolate from what is evident in that meta-analysis about the capacity of ivermectin

1:19:57 And, of course, that will create profits for a long time to come. industry in a program to develop a new oral antiviral pill. Okay? and one of them is called RNA-dependent polymerase. Thank you. And it interferes and binds with that. And so if you don't have that Ivermectin is the COVID killer and should be save lives, doesn't reduce mechanical ventilation when you have other drugs that do.

1:23:27 and I would say I would like that our paper and our advocacy was part of what made them pay weeks now, that agency put out their paper, their paper looking at the data of their program. And If had I, you know, with hindsight, had you done more of a weight-based, right, because we're not all the same, bigger you are, you probably need a little bit more.

1:25:42 analyst that works with us, a guy named Juan Chimay, who I think, when all is said and done in a couple of years, will be a historic figure. We have these peaks, we have these, the epidemiologic curves of cases and deaths. But when you look at the ivermectin initiations, But I do know those are two large preeminent healthcare agents. But the federal health

1:27:49 And so, but the fact that our government isn't talking to the group of doctors that headed We could probably drive down there today. They also are reporting there they had 40% less hospitalization, 30% less death, and because so many people were dying. really credible, in fact, to me, that's probably the most powerful But actually, hold up for just a second, Jamie.

1:30:46 gone back and forth about it a number of times. And I tried to focus him on a couple of things. Those glasses, by the way, are preposterous. Much better to just not get sick and to eradicate the virus. But we save a definitely large number of people if we drive it to extinction. And the basic idea is, do you guys remember what R naught is from the beginning of the pandemic?

1:33:32 two. So the green line there is just below the line that we would draw for COVID. This graph R0 becomes R sub F in the treatment. there, ivermectin was slaying the Delta variant. seeing these variances pop out, I have gotten no data to suggest it doesn't work against any there joe but not really not really that means sarcastic there's no money to be made it's just

1:37:31 you do if you were in charge? And what you hear back is the most maddening, well, you know, I'm science. Some of it is just intellectual skepticism like this, what we call evidence-based medicine. Well, the profit part is, I mean, I agree that's one of them. Now, whether they're doing it on purpose or not. So they literally, in their review, they say, you know, we noticed that all of the studies

1:40:48 And so there's something that happens, which is a publication, by the way, you only see And the way you combat publication bias is when you do a clinical trial of a medicine, Because their objection wasn't a real objection. Yeah, so that trial- And none of 237 of 407 got COVID. 58% that shows you how high risk these people were It's just insane that these calls for, or these criticisms of potential publication bias aren't met with

1:44:27 And what that, I think I forgot to say, the Y-axis on there is the one fly in the ointment, And the farther below one the effectiveness is, the more rapidly we can drive it to extinction. Yeah, he's so great. data? And, you know, as you're following these patients, and he says, still today, out of those And apparently, ivermectin is really damaging to the wallet, Joe.

1:47:22 been taken down. Oh, a long time ago. Yeah. I mean, They mention it. Yeah. So I got interviewed for it, and I thought it was a fair representation. He balanced both sides. Been covering lots of COVID-related topics. If you demonetize people enough for very specific subjects, where information is distributed have teamed up to prevent the distribution of what they're calling

1:50:49 In this case, I really think we need to start thinking in terms of capture that extends to other places, right? You expect the regulator to be captured, but you don't necessarily expect Why is it that we are not giving? even if they got there from confusion, where we're trying to reach herd immunity in order to ostensibly drive the pathogen to extinction, where this drug appears to give people immunity

1:53:30 Great way to fill that hole of people who aren't going to get vaccinated. I mean, imagine that you took the vaccine, right? If you were going to insist that children have some sort of protection in spite of the fact that they tolerate COVID very well, ivermectin would be a far better choice. You know, one difference, I don't know how big And everyone is saying listen to the captain.

1:55:48 I love those. I love those analogies. Yes. Right. Why is the same guy in a position where he may have contributed to causing the pandemic? And now here he is in a position to do something about the pandemic. And he's making exactly the wrong decision. He's not wielding the tools we have. He's announcing a search for new tools as if the clear because, you know, Joe, what happened to me is, the guy that I was a year ago and the guy

1:58:22 our insights into the disease that me and the group, we obsessively studied this disease. Because we knew it was critical in this disease. were all what's called observational trials back then, and so there's a lot of what are called recruited by the University of Wisconsin five years ago. But I know guys and gals in every They weren't coming off. and we're finding they're not getting intubated, you know, they're coming off ventilators,

2:02:25 gets better, not some predefined time. And I think we talked about it on your podcast, Seven weeks later, Oxford put out the recovery trial, which is their big trial in the UK, And I kept seeing doctors using six milligrams The human condition is a bit variable, don't you think? deciding that we can't talk in public about this topic means that that process can't happen. Now,

2:05:25 understood to be what it is. And that, I have the sense, is the key thing that explains everything but you stopped. You didn't go back to it. It's long COVID and the effectiveness on long COVID. but long COVID, right? they can't participate in their relationships they can't do the fun stuff that they do triggering the immune cells. And so what's interesting is ivermectin is showing really

2:09:02 it has, we think, a number of antiviral properties. So it interrupts the What's interesting about long COVID is if you talk to a patient, yeah, you keep doing the studies, just help me to feel better, right? Whereas quite a few others, I'd say the majority, kind of need. But the thing is, I just want to, if I can, just talk about our organization because it is a nonprofit, Joe.

2:11:41 We have encountered numerous patients who've gotten quite sick after the vaccines and That's been another really satisfying aspect. The evidence for binding the spike protein is more what's called in silico. is clinical experience. But it's becoming larger and wider. Again, my network of physicians that The fact that the vaccines utilize spike protein at the level of the drawing board makes sense.

2:15:26 out, this is nonsense because what we know, what we learned too late to prevent the vaccine or these vaccines, have already failed at several different levels. The way the vaccine is supposed the blood-brain barrier, so it opens up holes into the brain. So, you know, when you're talking whatever its mechanism of action, and there seem to be several, seems to be effective in

2:18:34 Now, let me ask you this about the spike protein, this effect. Yeah. and then you can see where it ends up in a mouse model. we had a test that wasn't capable of seeing smaller amounts that circulate around the body. But what you said was correct on both. And this coating is now floating around the body. So all I can say is I agree with the question because it does seem to be that it's

2:23:17 It's like, I smell bullshit, but not really. Yeah, exactly. It's like you would be super skeptical. they don't have any influence right now over Spotify, whereas there's some, whatever it is. distinction, you put motion, you put some events into motion, some actions, and it's very difficult to get people to admit that they made a mistake. You have to curate that discussion and eliminate that.

2:26:10 Okay, now you've created a tool. generalist toolkit, but I'm not a doctor. I'm not a virologist, right? I could be wrong about And we talked briefly about that. if you want to censor that, you know, that's clear because if you don't, people will get hurt, hurt yourself. From medicines, from medical misinformation, you want to put that on the I agree with what you just said.

2:29:52 for steroids, many doctors started using it. Actually, that wasn't censored. Actually, Now, normally, right, you would say, well, that's wise. So let's censor that, too. still follows the U.S. or set of humans account, right? But these patients are really hard to get better once they're in ICU. rooms, either on ventilators or not, they can't see. There's no visitors. And they're all alone.

2:33:27 So we're doing actually for, it's about three grams IV every six hours. Yeah, did I say that wrong? the hospital, we have, and this disease is really complex. It has a number of different inflammatory properties, which is kind of a cool story, too. Malone, the literal inventor of mRNA vaccine technology. So YouTube somehow feels qualified institutionalized, generally not known for their physical health or good nutritional habits. I mean,

2:36:34 it was a proxy for the antidepressant that they were on. And so that's sort of what kind of engendered the investigations. And now we have a number of trials showing that that antidepressant, of people, right? So if you had, let's say, certain way. Now, I don't support this, but I do recognize that it's an actual problem. How do you That's a... I don't know.

2:39:19 Right. in a very prominent journal, All of the evidence shows it works. But at the same time, when you look at what I call the totality of the evidence, what we talked about, prevention, epidemiologic, early, late, randomized, observational. We can't prove it works, but it's highly associated in that now in double-blind randomized controlled trials very carefully done is really showing that it eradicates the virus.

2:43:35 pillar of efficacy. The existing evidence at the time of that guideline, we know because their They deliberately left out scientific evidence to show efficacy of a drug because they didn't Correlation does imply causation when there's a preexisting hypothesis. is, but the presumption would have to be that it is, And again, I'd love to know, you know, it'd be wonderful to know exactly what the truth of what's in front of us is.

2:47:21 conclusions. Where are they doing that? Where are those papers being published? Right. You weren't spamming anyone about ivermectin. as much as this is a medical issue there's a bunch of things going on here this is a public What you do is beyond, in my opinion, it's beyond reproach losing your channel. And this is the argument that everyone who is anti-censorship has said

2:49:33 And what we're seeing, it's not wackos that are saying the cell towers are killing people it in a way that it's going to give people at least the ability to make an educated decision. we all agree, it's really harmful and it's actually hurting people and it's hurting people on a global scale. But, you know, I have faith. I've seen now we're starting to see that there

2:52:15 They've been using it aggressively and they have some of the best numbers, not only in really great doctor. Her name's Jackie Stone. She at one point said a couple of months ago, unfortunately those leaders that we look to for good guidance. We just haven't gotten it. that's being ignored. Appreciate it.