Dr Pierre Kory – On Ivermectin – At Euro Parliament Summit 2023 is the video above. Below is my transcript with my bolds from closed captions and exhibits from a similar, longer presentation at Rumble.
Thank you I appreciate the invitation. I want to speak about a topic; I don’t think any of the topics today are pleasant, but this one is particularly unpleasant to me. I’m going to talk about the global war on Ivermectin. There was a massive Global disinformation campaign whose only objective is to suppress the evidence of efficacy of this life-saving drug. My colleague Dr Brouqui just referred to the war on Hydroxychloroquine.
I’m going to take you through this almost like a case study showing what they do. Keep in mind it has nothing to do with Ivermectin, and everything to do with a decades-long war. They’ve been doing these things for decades on any generic off patent drug which threatens their profits.
This is a forest plot. On the left are medicines that have trials to show that they’re effective against Covid. We have 43 effective therapies. Likely you’ve not heard of any of them if you live in the United States. The only ones approved are the ones that are circled. They have something in common, which is they’re all absurdly expensive and present massive profits to pharmaceutical companies. Any medicine, no matter how many studies supporting it–if it costs a dollar or two, it will not find regulatory approval in any Advanced Health economy around the world. And as a result people die. They die frequently and in high numbers because there’s a barrier to getting access to these medicines, to having them recommended. Currently Ivermectin it has the most studies of any therapy, 95 controlled trials, over 40 are randomized and showing a massive evidence of efficacy.
Now why would they attack Ivermectin? Ivermectin probably, and hydroxychloroquine there, I would consider them almost equal presented a massive threat. It would have halted the vaccine campaign. If they were following the rules, which is you can’t have an effective therapy. It would have skyrocketed the Public Enemy Number One, which is something called Vaccine Hesitancy. Because this was all about the vaccine, and so they had to go after these drugs. It also threatens the profits of all of the Therapeutics that they were rushing out and barely improving on manipulated actually fraudulent single Studies by these companies. So if you talk about remdessivir, paxlovid and monopirovir: Billion dollar contracts were written by our government before those studies ever were published. There were press releases issued and contracts signed, and billions of dollars went into the pharmaceutical companies hands. They could not have a competitor.
So how did they do this? Well it’s called disinformation, and I’m going to be speaking specifically to the tactics used by Industries when science emerges that’s inconvenient to their industry interests. Every industry follows this playbook when science emerges that’s threatens their interests. No industry is more skilled at this than the pharmaceutical industry.
In modern times with the consolidation of Media power, they control social media
and they’ve completely captured regulatory Health agencies.
Across Advanced Health economies, they can make you believe that things are true; they can make you believe that things are false. And it makes you complicit in their own device. It’s largely centered around the use of propaganda and censorship, yet their abilities to do both of those things are historically unparalleled. We now have a global media and communication system which allows them to do this propaganda and censorship worldwide.
The biggest and the foundation of this entire disinformation campaign, I’m sorry to tell you, occurred at the level of the studies that were done by big agencies. So the biggest and highest funded studies were the most corrupt. And it occurred at the level of the highest impact medical journals in the world as well. The world’s leading Health agencies, one of which is in the US.
Keep in mind they were they were scared of Ivermectin from the beginning. My colleague Dr Robert Malone and other researchers had already identified Ivermectin as effective against at least a dozen RNA viruses before covid began. They were worried about Ivermectin and its antiviral properties. So when the Nobel prize winning Discoverer Omura asked Merck his old partner: “ I think we should study Ivermectin for covid, what did Merck say? “No thank you.” in the middle of a global pandemic.
Merck went even farther and one night in February of 2021 when there was nothing to support these three statements; I will tell you their public relations team put this on their website.
Now to find that a big big pharmaceutical company would publish lies on their website is completely unsurprising to me. But the surprise in this was the launched media campaigns around the world where media trumpeted over and over started to echo a pharmaceutical company whose three statements are so obviously protecting their profits. And this became a PR campaign that went around the world: “ Merck says that Ivermectin doesn’t work.”
So you could see this started early before there was any evidence to show that it didn’t work. In fact at the time of my testimony two months prior to that statement, I already had 35 controlled trials, 17 of which were randomized controlled trials. There was already an immense amount of evidence showing its efficacy. As of two weeks ago we have 95 controlled trials with 134, 000 patients.
If you look at the forest plot to the side all of the green squares that were going all the way to the left are showing large magnitude estimates of efficacy from dozens and dozens of Trials. These are only the early treatment trials. IVM is the most proven medication in history, yet not one Advanced Health economy around the world recommends it. Almost all hospitals have removed it from their formularies, and if you try to get filled at a pharmacy, any Retail Pharmacy in any of those developed countries, the pharmacist will not do it. They’re scared to death.
The trials. So how come we have all of these big rigorous large high quality trials? There’s
actually only been six of them, so out of the 95 trials, the only ones you’ve seen on the front pages of your newspapers are what I call the Big Six. Out of that 95 there were six trials that were heavily funded and carried out by investigators; they’re called the largest and high quality trials. What did
they show?
Somehow they concluded, in contradiction to all of the other trials,
that Ivermectin wasn’t effective.
How did they do that? Because they know how to do it and have been doing it for a while. They can design trials to show you something works, they can design trials to show you something doesn’t work. They’ve pulled the same tricks over and over again. All you need to know about those six trials compared to the 95: With one exception those were the only trials where every almost every single investigator was drowning in Financial conflicts of interests with pharmaceutical companies.
Every other trial had no Financial conflicts of interest. So ask yourself: Why they reached conclusions that completely departed from the rest of the evidence base.

These are the big six and they appeared in the highest impact journals in the world: New England Journal of Medicine, the Journal of American Medical Association, British Medical Journal, The Lancet and the Annals of Internal Medicine. Every time they were published, they launched PR campaigns across the world. You saw radio and television stations and newspapers blaring latest high quality study shows that Ivermectin doesn’t work.
And then there’s lots of Trials showing that the Ivermectin Advocates of which I’m one, I will tell you every country in the world has experts on Ivermectin who have had to watch and witness this propaganda campaign.
This is one of the more egregious samples. This is my own country, funded by the National Institutes of Health which is our largest research funder. They just did a couple of Trials on Ivermectin in Active-6.
By the way the lead investigator Dr. Susanna Naggie owns stock in a competitor to Ivermectin and she also has conflicts of interest with Gilead which makes as well are Remdesivir and other products that compete with Ivermectin. Do you think that she’s an objective investigator? And do you think it’s an accident she was hired? It is not; she was hired on purpose to do this kind of stuff.
Look at this trial, originally designed to see the difference in symptoms at day 14 which would make sense for an acute viral illness. In the middle of the trial, mysteriously they decided to change the end point from day 14 to day 28. Why would they do that? So look at the results that they found at the posterior P efficacy column in the other table. Anything above 0.95 is a statistically significant result which would show that Ivermectin is superior. In the middle you can see this in the journal; it’s completely public knowledge, yet no one talks about it. Now you can see why they moved it from day 14 to day 28: It was to disappear the statistical significance favoring Ivermetin.
This paper was published in one of the top journals of the world with the conclusion that Ivermectin has no role in the treatment of covid. You know there’s no major differences at day 28, and by the way this are all mild patients. Very few went to the hospital, there was one death and that was in the Ivermectin group. They never got Ivermectin because they died beforehand.
I call it the big six because they were the big ones that were published in the highest impact journals, but it’s really seven. Let’s talk about this seventh one that was started a long time ago by the University of Oxford by the same investigator who did a 25,000 person trial on mobile. Which has been completed and we know the results which shows them when the period doesn’t work.
But it’s a little odd what happened to the Ivermectin trial. It has been 10 months since the trial completed with not one mention of the result. Does anyone find that anomalous or abnormal? When we had to hear results of remdesivir, paxlovid and molnupiravir by press release before the data was available. These people at Oxford are sitting on a positive trial and you know it they won’t publish. They also did other stuff.
Let’s look at the designs of these trials. This is so Brazen. If you want to show something’s effective, you’re going to make sure to get the study drug into that patient immediately and as early as possible to maximize benefit. So they did a median of two days in a 25, 000 person trial, which is a fantastic achievement. I would love to see that kind of science being practiced everywhere. Only problem was the drug wasn’t effective.
What do they do with Ivermectin? They allow up to 14 days to start the medicine. And we have evidence from some of the participants that they were totally well by the time they got their medicines. This is a fake trial not a real one. But I think they weren’t good enough at what they were doing, because they’re sitting on a positive result. There’s no other explanation why 10 months have gone by and we haven’t heard. They are laying low, sitting quiet because they’ve seen that a lot of us around the world have found all of the fraud and brazen manipulations in the other large trials.
They also did something else. Curiously in the middle of the trial they suddenly announced the halting of the trial and the trialist from Oxford literally claimed to the world that they ran out of ivermectin. Which is so absurd: No self-respecting trials would ever run out of a study drug in the middle. Funny thing is there’s one functioning journalist left in the world and that was at The Epoch Times, and they did they actually did some journalism. They called the pharmaceutical company that was supplying the Ivermectin to Oxford and asked: Hey did you guys run out of ivermectin?” Their answer: “No we have plenty.” This is the kind of stuff they’re doing.
Beyond the Selective publication of negative trials by pharmaceutical companies’ conflicted researchers, in my book which is soon to be published I have numerous examples of researchers around the world with positive randomized controlled Trials of ivermectin they were uniformly and systematically rejected from publication, from any journal in the first or second tier of medical journals. There is an editorial Mafia that controls our top medical journals. Science has been completely corrupted. Beyond the rejections are those that actually manage to go through peer review and get published, but were suddenly retracted for reasons we’d never heard of in our careers.
Me and my group have published over 150 peer-reviewed articles, never had one retracted. First time in our lives was our Ivermectin paper.
And then we had to read editorial after editorial you know propelling these narratives that circulated in the media relentlessly: “Don’t believe Ivermectin science, the studies are all low quality, too small in different countries, the doses aren’t the same, it can’t be believed, wait for the real signs.” These are the narratives that they’ve used to try to destroy the evidence of efficacy.
This is an example. They picked one trial and they they supposedly found it to be fraudulent. It may or may not have been; there are some unreliable trials in any body of evidence. Researchers say about 20% of Trials will be fraudulent, not unique to Ivermectin. But the world’s leading researcher hired by the WHO in UK published a phenomenally positive meta-analysis which is a summary of 24 randomized control trials which showed statistically significant improvements in mortality, hospitalization time, to clinical recovery and time to viral clearance.
I hadn’t talked to him in a few months and I saw that he published that paper and I couldn’t believe how astoundingly positive that paper was. I could believe it by the fact that the media was silent. It was not carried and then I think the other side got real worried because Andy started behaving very differently. He self-retracted his own paper
And he started removing randomized control trials using invented categories this is from his exact paper it looks like a five-year-old who’s trying to disappear the evidence of efficacy. So he makes up these categories “potentially fraudulent” no definition of what kind of study that is. And then this other category which is “some concerns” So there’s a category of evidence which is when Dr Andrew Hill has some concerns, so he removes and disappears the evidence base to the point where it loses statistical significance. And now he’s claiming it doesn’t work. A bizarre turnaround for this researcher
I’m going to finish with the agencies. We know they control; you cannot work at a health agency without making Pharma happy. Your career is over, you’re off of committees, you don’t graduate from the agencies to get jobs in pharmaceutical unless you do their bidding. They are completely in lockstep. What happened with the Ivermectin story in the United States is that in the middle of August of 2021 Ivermectin prescriptions hit 90,000 a week. They were skyrocketing, everyone was figuring out it was working, everybody was prescribing. In a very short sequence you saw our CDC send out a memo to every State Department of Health which then went to every licensed physician in that state. And that memo said careful of ivermectin we’re seeing overdoses and people are getting injured. They made it out to be a dangerous drug when it’s one of the safest, if not the safest medication we have in history.
And after they said that it was dangerous, all the professional Societies in the United States, without any authority sent out memos to every doctor in the country calling for an immediate cessation of prescribing of ivermectin. What followed was the horse dewormer PR campaign was launched. You can tell a PR campaign in the narrative when it’s two weeks four different channels and that’s what you saw; late night talk show host, News hosts, newspapers, magazines, radio–”Horse dewormer, horse dewormer, horse dewormer. and
At the end of those two weeks no self-respecting doctor would ever prescribe
such a dangerous and ineffective drug and no patient would want to get it.
Do you think that PR campaign was invented in August of 2021, it was not. It was launched in 2021 because they saw they were losing this war against Ivermectin. And here we are at the end of three years and it’s been shut down in most of the advanced health economies around the world. One of the most effective drugs in history, that would have saved millions of lives. This was a humanitarian catastrophe and a crime against humanity yet no one will go to jail for it.















I don’t know how effective Ivermectin could or would have been. What I do know is that the world got sold a mangy dog with the vaccines. The impact of that sort of crazy we experienced with Covid is going to cause problems for many year to come.
LikeLike
Ron, the next to last graphic “The Foundation…” is in the transcript twice. Thanks for doing the transcript.
LikeLike
Thanks Bud. Fixed.
LikeLike
Thank you Ivermectin… I would not take their spikey vax.
LikeLike