My Due Diligence: The Jab, Dietary Supplements, and Multiple Sclerosis

“I want to assure you that the vaccine is safe and effective.  Millions of people in the United States and across the world have received the COVID-19 vaccine.  The COVID-19 vaccines have gone through the most  intensive safety monitoring in U.S. history.  And in our own health system, we have seen that almost 6 out of every 7 patients who must go to the hospital for COVID-19 are not vaccinated.  This proves how well the vaccine works to protect against the virus.  I highly urge you to protect yourself and your family… Thank you for the trust you place in me and my team to care for you.” – My GP’s instructions to me on March 16, 2022

I decided to become a War Room/DailyClout Pfizer Documents Analysis Volunteer when I was doing my own risk/benefit analysis for the COVID-19 vaccine after my doctors had strongly recommended that I get it.  I don’t have a medical or scientific background but I do have Multiple Sclerosis so my point of view comes from my experience as an MS patient.  I was never vaccine hesitant but I became so as a result of this experience.

What follows is my risk/benefit analysis of the COVID-19 vaccine from the point of view of an MS patient.  Here is what I found regarding:

• the safety and effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccine
• pharmaceuticals  vs. vitamins and dietary supplements as treatment options

I was diagnosed with MS in September of 2011; I was 57.  At the time of my diagnosis my doctor told me not to get the seasonal flu vaccines because, as I remember it, “they might confuse my immune system.”  I began taking Gilenya (fingolimod), manufactured by Novartis, which had been approved by the FDA in September of 2010, as the first oral treatment for relapsing forms of MS.  My understanding of this particular Disease Modifying Therapy (DMT) was that, although new, it had been under review and extensively studied for about 15 years before being approved by the FDA.  [See “A Mechanistically Novel, First Oral Therapy for Multiple Sclerosis: The Development of Fingolimod (FTY720, Gilenya)” by Jerold Chun, MD, Phd and Volker Brinkman, PhD in Discovery Magazine 2011 September; 12(64): 213-228.  NIH-Public Access Author Manuscript]

I tolerated the Gilenya well and thought it miraculous in terms of symptom management.  However, after awhile I began to feel like a drug addict because of my dependency on it and the copay assistance program that Novartis granted me since I couldn’t afford it otherwise.  (From memory, at that time the cost of Gilenya was $6000/mo. with a copay of $1200/mo.)  Every month, in order to get my refill, I had to have a phone interview with a representative from Novartis and I lived in fear of the possibility that one day I would no longer qualify for the assistance.

After 6 years on Gilenya my neurologist told me that new studies had revealed a possible side effect, melanoma, from the drug and I should see a dermatologist to get cleared.  I learned that indeed I had a melanoma and I immediately stopped taking Gilenya.  Fortunately the melanoma was excised successfully, and my neurologist recommended I go on another (yet newer) DMT drug instead.  But I wondered if this was an opportunity to get off these drugs completely and see where I was at with respect to the management of my MS without them.  I decided to develop my own cocktail of vitamins and dietary supplements and concentrate on stress management (which was easier now that I wasn’t stressed about getting my refills every month).  My neurologist was supportive of this approach and my MS symptoms have been controlled successfully—as successfully as I felt Gilenya had controlled them—ever since.

Fast forward to COVID-19 and the rollout of the mRNA vaccine.  I was strongly urged, without a single caveat for my MS, to get it by both my neurologist and my GP.  Frankly, I was shocked given my experience with Gilenya and, on the grounds that the mRNA vaccine was so new, I said I would do my own research into the relative risks vs. benefits of this COVID-19 vaccine.

Now here I am…in over my head with these Pfizer clinical trial documents but nevertheless convinced that the neurological adverse events associated with the vaccine that are mentioned in the documents are going to result in more diagnoses of MS.  It makes absolutely no sense to me that, according to Pfizer, these neurological adverse events do “not raise new safety issues” when it often takes years for issues to present themselves; it can also take years for a patient to even get an official diagnosis of MS.   [See for example Pfizer document 5.3.6 Cumulative Analysis of Post-Authorization Adverse Event Reports of PF-07302048 (BNT162B2)Received Through 28-Feb-2021 pg. 21]  

Are the COVID-19 vaccines safe and effective for MS patients?

Reading through the Pfizer clinical trial documents is overwhelming for me; but to my untrained eye one thing consistently stands out:  Pfizer’s conclusions—one line variations, like a broken record, of “safe and effective”–just do not jive with the pages and pages and pages and pages of data that precede this unwavering assertion.  I felt like I was being hoodwinked.  Fortunately, there are others associated  with the DailyClout Pfizer Document Analysis team, far more qualified than I am, to help me.  Melanie Brown, for example, published “Understanding C-19 Efficacy Clinical Trial in Lay Terms”  [https://dailyclout.io/understanding-c-19-vaccine-efficacy-clinical-trial-in-lay-terms/ ] and there are many reports that challenge Pfizer’s “safe and effective” mantra in the DailyClout Pfizer Reports Archive. [https://dailyclout.io/categary/campaigns/pfizer-documents-analysis/] 

DailyClout is not the only publisher to challenge the safety and efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccines.  The European Journal of Epidemiology published a study that looked at data comparing relative vulnerability to COVID-19 in vaccinated versus unvaccinated populations and concluded that there were more COVID-19 cases in the more highly vaccinated populations.  [See “Increases in COVID-19 are unrelated to levels of vaccination across 68 countries and 2947 counties in the United States” by S.V. Subramanian and Akhil Kumar in European Journal of Epidemiology (2021) 36:1237-1240]  An article in Virology Journal discusses vaccine-acquired immunodeficiency syndrome and cautions that COVID-19 vaccination is a major risk factor for infections in critically ill patients.  [See “Adverse effects of COVID-19 vaccines and measures to prevent them” by Kenji Yamamoto in Virology Journal (2022) 19:100]

When my GP told me to get the COVID-19 vaccine and I respectfully declined, I received some patient instructions unlike any I had ever received regarding vaccines (or any other pharmaceutical for that matter) because they had nothing to do with my personal health:  I was strongly recommended to get the vaccine to protect my loved ones.  Safety and efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccine were presumed and my personal circumstances as a patient were ignored.  To quote my GP from my Patient Instructions in my After Visit Summary from 3/16/22,

“I want to assure you that the vaccine is safe and effective.  Millions of people in the United States and across the world have received the COVID-19 vaccine.  The COVID-19 vaccines have gone through the most intensive safety monitoring in U.S. history.  And in our own health system, we have seen that almost 6 out of every 7 patients who must go to the hospital for COVID-19 are not vaccinated.  This proves how well the vaccine works to protect against the virus.  I highly urge you to protect yourself and your family…Thank you for the trust you place in me and my team to care for you.”

Based on my research up to the point of receiving these patient instructions, I realized that what my GP was telling me was false; it was blatant misinformation.  Moreover, this GP’s instructions sounded condescending and manipulative to me and fueled my vaccine hesitancy instead of alleviating it. 

Separately, my neurologist’s verbal recommendation didn’t mention my loved ones, yet I still felt that my personal circumstances as an MS patient were minimized.  What both professionals shared was a complete lack of specific data to back up their claim that the COVID-19 vaccine was, in fact, both safe and effective for me. 

I was not alone in my hesitancy to get the COVID-19 vaccine.  A study conducted at the University Hospital Bern in 2018-2020 stated that “Vaccine hesitancy is a complex public health issue… Using pneumococcal vaccination, which is recommended in [certain] multiple sclerosis patients, as a model, [researchers] assessed vaccination behavior in patients with MS to prepare for the upcoming SARS-CoV-2 vaccination challenge.”  [Emphasis mine.]  The study showed that 41.3% of the patients with MS did not get the recommended pneumococcal vaccination.  [See “Vaccine Hesitancy in Patients With Multiple Sclerosis” by Lara Diem, MD, Christoph Friedli, MD, Andrew Chan, MD, et al. in Neurol Neuroimmunol Neuroinflamm 2021;8;DOI 10.1212/NXI.0000000000000991 a journal of the American Academy of Neurology]

The issue of safety and efficacy with respect to the COVID-19 vaccine for MS patients was debatable before the Pfizer clinical trial documents were released.   A series of case studies was presented in a report published 4 September 2021 by the Journal of Neurology that stated “it is largely unknown to what extent COVID-19 vaccines are safe and effective in the MS population.”  The cases were considered anecdotal and therefore do “not prove a cause-and-effect relationship between SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines and active CNS demyelinating disease.”  Yet, the “clinical and MRI features of [the] seven individuals who received SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines within a few weeks of either the first or second dose, developed new neurologic symptoms and MRI findings consistent with active CNS demyelination.  This was either new onset demyelinating disease or exacerbation of known MS.” [See “COVID-19 mRNA vaccination leading to CNS inflammation: a case series” by Mahsa Khayat-Khoei, Shamik Bhattacharyya, Joshua Katz, et al in Journal of Neurology (2022) 269:1093-1106]

It turns out these anecdotal reports of MS related diseases after vaccination in patients are not isolated cases.  On September 19, 2022 The Epoch Times published an article that asks and offers answers to the question, ‘Why are experts concerned more about the vaccines than the virus?’  One response is that “autoimmunity is already a human problem [and] now we’re introducing a possibility for a massive number of new autoimmune syndromes, and it’s just because of the indiscriminate use of COVID-19 vaccines.”  Furthermore, since the rollout of the COVID-19 mRNA and DNA injections this article observes that “reports of neuromyelitis, multiple sclerosis, Guillain-Barre syndrome, rheumatoid arthritis, shingles, lupus, diabetes, and many other autoimmune conditions have either suddenly appeared, or relapsed, often with worsened symptoms.” [See “Spike Protein From Infection and Vaccines Contributing to Autoimmune Diseases, Studies Suggest” by Marina Zhang in The Epoch Times September 19, 2022]

If anecdotal evidence doesn’t prove a cause-and-effect relationship between the vaccines and active CNS demyelinating disease, perhaps the most damning evidence of all, then, comes not from the Pfizer clinical trial documents, but from the U.S. Defense Medical Epidemiological Database data dump.  The DMED is the official database of active duty DoD servicemen and servicewomen.  What’s notable is that the DMED data compares baseline data from 2016 to 2019 (pre SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19), 2020 (the first year of SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 when no vaccines were available) and 2021 (the year vaccines were available and mandated for the US Military).  Regarding the total number of diseases of the nervous system, the data shows a 968% increase post vaccine mandate and reports of Multiple Sclerosis, specifically, are up 614%.[See “Regarding the Defense Medical Epidemiological Database Data Dump” by Dr. Robert W. Malone [https://rwmalonemd.substack.com/p/regarding-the-defense-medical-epidemiological] February 5 2022]

The DMED data dump and the Pfizer clinical trial documents data dump have one important thing in common, however:  both Pfizer and the DoD tried to hide their data from the public.  The FDA lost a lawsuit after claiming they wouldn’t release Pfizer’s documents for 75 years.  And the DoD deleted data from it’s database to cover up damages done by the vaccines.  This cover-up may be an even bigger scandal than the data itself.   [See https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/healthcare/judge-scraps-75-year-timeline-for-fda-to-release-pfizer-vaccine-safety-data-giving-agency-eight-months January 7, 2022 and  “DMED data is explosive.  Mainstream media has been ordered to ignore it.” by Steve Kirsch   [https://stevekirsch.substack.com/p/this-medical-data-from-the-dod ] February 5 2022]

Why are the COVID-19 vaccines being recommended to MS patients? 

When I declined to get the COVID-19 vaccine, both of my doctors did not bolster their recommendation with specific data to back up their claim that the vaccine was safe and effective in general or with respect to MS patients.  Both doctors invoked the CDC and the FDA.  My neurologist said that the National Multiple Sclerosis Society, the Multiple Sclerosis Foundation, and the Multiple Sclerosis Association of America all recommended the COVID-19 vaccine for MS patients.  I was unable to find specific data or references to specific studies on these MS websites that substantiated these claims.   [See https://www.nationalmssociety.org/coronavirus-covid-19-information/covid-19-vaccine-guidance, https://mymsaa.org/ms-information/coronavirus-covid-19-and-ms  and https://msfocus.org/Magazine/Magazine-Items/Exclusive-Content/2022/COVID-19-remains-a-risk.aspx] 

I was also unable to find on these websites, specific information about the mRNA vaccines and how they differ from any other vaccine.  The CDC actually changed the definition of vaccine/vaccination three times since 2015 but it was done so under the radar and, when questioned about this, defensively claimed that changes to the CDC’s vaccination definition are “normal.”  [See “Experts say changes to CDC’s vaccination definition are normal” by Sophia Tulp, APNews.com, February 9, 2022]   In DailyClout’s Pfizer Report 36 on August 1, 2022, Dr. Robert W. Chandler called the COVID-19 vaccine a “novel gene therapy for a novel virus” and concluded that the “ten months to develop [it] is well short of the five to 10 years usually required to develop, test and refine such a product.”  [ https://dailyclout.io/pfizer-used-dangerous-assumptions-rather-than-research-to-guess-at-outcomes/ ]  On October 6, 2022, Dr. Naomi Wolf followed up on Dr. Chandler’s article with a discussion about the specific delivery system inherent in the “world’s first mRNA-LPN [lipid nanoparticles]-based vaccine” and many questions about how this new type of vaccine might be affecting those who had received it.  [ https://dailyclout.io/lipid-nanoparticles-are-they-subtly-changing-human-beings ] 

I was troubled, therefore, by the ubiquitous generalization on the MS websites that it’s best to vaccinate MS patients.  According to the NMSS, “While research is underway to learn more about the specific experience of people with MS receiving a COVID-19 vaccination, data on the safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines in those with MS are currently limited. Our guidance is based on clinical trials of the general population and studies of other vaccines administered to people with MS. We will update our guidance as more is learned from scientific studies of the vaccines.”  [See https://www.nationalmssociety.org/coronavirus-covid-19-information/covid-19-vaccine-guidance#section-0 ] None of these websites referred to the scientific studies contained in the Pfizer clinical trial documents, or the DailyClout Pfizer Reports Archive, or the fact that the very definition of vaccine had changed so recently.

Is there an interaction between vaccines and DMTs for MS patients?

I did find some discussion on the COVID-19 vaccine as part of an arsenal of options for MS patients which include DMTs.  [See for example https://www.nationalmssociety.org/coronavirus-covid-19-information/ms-treatment-guidelines-during-coronavirus]  This, for example, is on the MS Foundation’s website:

“While having MS does not make us more likely to get COVID-19 (or other infections), some of our DMTs do lower our response to vaccines and even blunt our immune systems from mounting adequate protection against future infections when we actually do get the virus. This is a reminder to all on these medications (which are highly effective at helping to manage MS): you may not have the protection you think you might from your three or four doses of vaccine…”  [https://msfocus.org/Magazine/Magazine-Items/Exclusive-Content/2022/COVID-19-remains-a-risk.aspx ] 

But most of the discussion is on vaccine use in general with respect to the concurrent use of DMTs and not specific to the COVID-19 vaccine:  According to the NMSS, for example, preventing infections through vaccine use is a key part of medical care for people with MS but before starting any DMT, one should talk with their healthcare provider about any vaccines they should get or have recently received. [ https://www.nationalmssociety.org/Living-Well-With-MS/Diet-Exercise-Healthy-Behaviors/Vaccinations ] 

I found this caveat to be the norm on MS websites and PubMed: “more investigations with detailed safety data are needed” qualified the assertion that there is “no clear evidence suggesting a potential risk of disease reactivation in MS patients on DMTs after vaccination against SARS-CoV-2.”  Yet juxtaposed is the conclusion that even more important than needing more investigations regarding safety and efficacy is the need to decrease MS patients’ hesitancy and increase adherence to vaccination schemes.   [See “Response of COVID-19 vaccination in multiple sclerosis patients following disease-modifying therapies: A meta-analysis” by Wu X, Wang L, Shen L, Tang K.  EBioMedicine. 2022 Jul;81:104102. doi: 10.1016/j.ebiom.2022.104102. Epub 2022 Jun 24. PMID: 35759920; PMCID: PMC9230320.] 

What role, if any, do dietary supplements play in the management of MS symptoms?

So what’s an MS patient to do?  

My response was to take an even closer look at the role of vitamins and dietary supplements in managing my symptoms.  Although my neurologist was initially 100% supportive of me using dietary supplements instead of pursuing another DMT, as soon as I became hesitant about the COVID-19 vaccine this support was downgraded.  Cautions were issued.  Again, I was surprised at this inconsistent response from my long time health care provider and I asked for new data on the use of vitamins and dietary supplements thinking maybe the science had changed.  

I was encouraged to review what these same three MS associations had to say on this subject.  I was also encouraged to look at the work of Dr. Allen C. Bowling, an expert on the use of lifestyle medicine and complementary and alternative medicine in Multiple Sclerosis.  [Dr. Bowling’s website is http://neurologycare.net ]  My neurologist said that his work is the primary source for recommendations and cautions with respect to the use of vitamins and dietary supplements in the management of MS symptoms.  My neurologist admitted, however, that none of the recommended sources were new; they all predated the emergence of COVID-19.

To summarize my findings according to Dr. Bowling and others, here are the things that stood out to me:

• With respect to dietary supplements, Dr. Bowling recommends  that MS patients  “use a ‘single bullet’ rather than [a] ‘shotgun’ approach.  In the past, some believed that dietary supplements had beneficial effects or no effects at all.  This led some to advocate for shotgun approaches that utilized a large number of supplements and assumed that the many supplements would be therapeutic or neutral.  In fact, many studies over the past 20 years have shown that modest doses of commonly used vitamins and minerals may actually have adverse effects, including the risk for heart disease, various forms of cancers, and overall mortality.  Thus, supplements, like drugs, may have negative health effects.  Given this situation, it is important to use more of a single bullet approach with supplements.  In other words, if supplements are used, the number of supplements should be limited and specific supplements should be used only after careful consideration of safety and effectiveness information.” [See Bowling, Allen C., Optimal Health with Multiple Sclerosis: A Guide to Integrating Lifestyle, Alternative, and Conventional Medicine Demos Health: New York 2014, p. 29]

• In a brochure published by the NMSS, Dr. Bowling wrote “Dietary supplements, such as those discussed in this booklet, are not studied with the same rigor as FDA approved medicines for MS and sometimes little is known about risks and possible benefits…The best evidence is generally obtained from carefully controlled trials among a large group of people with MS…In the United States, supplements are not regulated in the same rigorous way that medications are.  Before being marketed, medications must undergo controlled clinical trials that demonstrate their effectiveness and safety for the treatment of particular medical conditions.” [See Bowling, Allen C., Vitamins, Minerals & Herbs in MS: An Introduction National MS Society 2018]

• From the essay “The Supplement Maze”, written by Deborah Eck and published by the MS Foundation, “Anything that promises a quick fix, gives severe warnings from the results of a single study, makes recommendations from studies done without peer reviews, draws simplistic conclusions, or makes recommendations to sell a product should be suspected of ‘junk science’.” [ https://msfocusmagazine.org/Magazine/Magazine-Items/Posted/The-Supplement-Maze.aspx ]

• The most recent article I found, published 12 September 2019, is in the journal Medicines:  “Dietary Supplements on Controlling Multiple Sclerosis Symptoms and Relapses: Current Clinical Evidence and Future Perspectives”.  This was also the most technical and detailed analysis of various supplements that I could find.  Yet the conclusion is not much different:  “Overall, several dietary supplements may decrease inflammation and fatigue, while increasing autoimmunity tolerance in MS patients, and thus improving quality of life and life expectancy.  However, it should be emphasized that there is no effective clinical indication, so far, for applying dietary supplementation as complementary treatment against MS symptomatology.  Further clinical trials focusing on each dietary supplementation separately as potential complementary therapeutic agent should be performed in this sensitive patient subpopulation.” [See “Dietary Supplements on Controlling Multiple Sclerosis Symptoms and Relapses: Current Clinical Evidence and Future Perspectives” by Christina Tryfonos, Maria Mantzorou, Dimitris Fotiou, et al in Medicines 2019, 6, 95; doi:10.3390/medicines6030095 www.mdpi.com/journal/medicines ]

I cannot help but be struck by the very great irony that there are far more cautions associated with ingestion of vitamins and dietary supplements than there are for the injection of a novel mRNA “vaccine” for this sensitive MS patient subpopulation.  I cannot help but feel bewilderment that despite more than 20 years of studies on natural substances not a single one is considered in-depth enough to count as reliable.  

Why are the pharmaceuticals more heartily recommended over the use of vitamins and dietary supplements?

MS patients’ immune systems are already in overdrive. This is what damages their central nervous systems.  Anything that boosts the immune system therefore has the potential to cause more damage.  This is the logic my neurologist used when I was cautioned about my use of dietary supplements.  Presumably (because I don’t remember the exact conversation at the time I was diagnosed with MS) this was the reason I was told that the annual flu vaccine would “confuse my immune system.”  So, with respect to the issue of boosting vs. suppressing the immune system in MS patients, a careful balance must be achieved.  This is one reason why choosing the right DMT is essential.  Each individual’s natural immunity must also be taken into account.  This is true whether one uses a DMT or dietary supplements or a combination of both.  Adding a vaccine to the mix just further complicates things.

Why then isn’t the same logic that’s used to caution against dietary supplements used to caution against the COVID-19 vaccine?  Weren’t we told that the COVID-19 vaccine would boost our immunity?  According to this logic, recommending the COVID-19 vaccine to MS patients seems just as problematic as using supplements.

Worse, though, is that we now know the COVID-19 vaccine does not bolster our immunity against the virus.  The repeated boosters further reduce efficacy.  The mRNA “vaccine” actually increases our risk for other diseases and destroys our natural immunity.  [See “Covid Vaccine Destroys Natural Immunity, NEJM Study Shows” by Will Jones in The Daily Sceptic September 12, 2022 which refers to other studies as well as the NEJM one (NEMJ 387;12 NEJM.org)  The mRNA-LPN vaccine platform “induces long-term unexpected immunological changes affecting both adaptive immune responses and heterologous protection against infections” [ See www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.05.03.21256520v1]   

It follows that since the mRNA vaccine is in a new class of vaccines which induce “complex functional reprogramming of innate immune responses” much more scrutiny is warranted. [See www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.03.16.484616v2full.pdf] 

MS patients want to achieve a delicate balance between boosting and suppressing their immune systems.  Even if one ignores the fact that the vaccine isn’t safe, there is no clear benefit to its broad brush use.

Alas, the vaccine continues to be pushed.  To challenge the safety and efficacy of the vaccine is to be censored.  And alternatives to the vaccine are considered ‘junk science’.  Medical careers are in jeopardy.  Funding is threatened.   

The financial incentives to push the pharmaceuticals far outweigh the incentive to pursue the supplements.  There are no profits in vitamins and supplements to the medical/pharmaceutical industrial complex.  As the list of available pharmaceutical DMTs for the treatment of MS grows ever longer, the voices of objection to the supplements are becoming louder.  

Consider, for example, the “Disinformation Assault on Vitamin D” by Dr. Robert Malone wherein he challenges a September 12, 2022 Washington Post “Advice/Ask a Doctor” hitpiece that disses Vitamin D.  In his October 8, 2022 rebuttal, Dr. Malone states “If enough people wake up, pulling back the curtain on Vitamin D as an alternative to COVID-19 vaccines would be a huge blow to the ‘safe and effective’ emergency use authorization narrative supporting more COVID vaccines and booster shots.  As we approach three years since the pandemic began, if the medical establishment/Big Government and Big Pharma continues to have it their way, less vitamin D supplements will flow into American households as time marches on.” [See https://rwmalonemd.substack.com/well-being-disinformation-assault?utm_source=email] 

In an earlier, May 7, 2022 article titled “Preventable Deaths and D3: The Ugly History of Vitamin D3 and Fauci’s pro-Vaccine Bias”, Dr. Malone presents context for the suppression of the use of Vitamin D3 by unelected officials from the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic and concludes that, “Many people (and physicians) rely on the CDC and NIH to guide them in healthcare and wellness decisions.  It is way past time that these organizations step up to the plate and do their job, and stop relying on the unscientific biases of highly influential bureaucrats.  That job being to protect the health of the public.  Not advancing the interests of the pharmaceutical industry and its shareholders.” [See https://rwmalonemd.substack.com/p/preventabledeaths-and-d3]

It is no coincidence that the assault on Vitamin D is playing out at the same time as the assault on ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine as inexpensive alternatives to the vaccine.  Preceding his book War on Ivermectin: The Medicine that Saved Millions and Could Have Ended the COVID Pandemic (to be published November 12, 2022), Dr Pierre Kory published an article on March 24, 2022 that includes Vitamin D along with “some of history’s safest and most widely available medicines like HCQ & IVM” as part of a “holistic strategy” for battling COVID-19.  Dr. Kory concludes that the U.S. government has a “clear bias for expensive high-profit drugs while ignoring lower-cost, readily and widely available [generic] treatments.” [ See https://pierrekory.substack.com/p/pfizers-state-of-the-union-address ]

The U.S. government’s bias against lower-cost alternatives is no more evident than in (D-IL) Senator Dick Durbin’s work to increase restrictions on dietary supplements by trying to sneak it into the FDA’s user fee reauthorization bill S.4090 submitted April 26, 2022.  [See www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/117/s4090 ] In an effort to further solidify BigPharma’s monopoly over medicine, the bill asserts that dietary supplements are unsafe.

Big Pharma’s bias against lower-cost alternatives to its DMTs is no more evident than in Novartis’ ongoing litigation against the generic fingolimod that was approved in December 2019.  Novartis claims it expects to lose $300 million in sales for the rest of 2022 if the generic for it’s “blockbuster” drug Gilenya is made available.  [See https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/novartis-asks-us-supreme-court-pause-gilenya-ruling-halt-generic-rivals-2022-09-29/ ]

Conclusions

With this revelation that Novartis is fighting against a generic for Gilenya, my personal risk/benefit analysis for the COVID-19 vaccine comes full circle:  

1. While the Gilenya may have been effective, the fact that it was prohibitively expensive contributed to my stress and the decision to try vitamin and dietary supplements instead.  Gilenya ultimately proved to be life-threateningly unsafe for me.  That fact was the number one reason I initially became COVID-19 vaccine hesitant.

2. The mRNA COVID-19 “vaccine” is neither safe nor effective.  This is as true for the general population as it is for MS patients.

3. DMTs and the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines are drugs that generate great profits for big pharmaceutical corporations.  Vitamin and dietary supplements, like other lower-cost generic treatments, which may indeed be more safe and effective than the DMTs and the mRNA vaccines, threaten Big Pharma’s profits.

4. We need more studies on the use of specific vitamins and dietary supplements as complimentary and alternative medicine.  We must counter the financial disincentives to pursue this.

5. I’ve discerned that doctors recommend DMTs and vaccines to MS patients, at least in part, because of their industry’s relationship to Big Pharma and to the large health systems that employ them.  There is also pressure from Big Pharma-funded government bureaucracies like the CDC, FDA, and NIH to push these pharmaceuticals.  To the most casual observer it is obvious that Corporate Support/Partnership—for health care providers, medical associations and journals, media organizations, etc.–is dominated by large pharmaceutical companies.  The brought-to-you-by-Pfizer-logo is particularly ubiquitious.

6. It is up to us as patients and as individuals to do our own due diligence when it comes to ingesting or injecting anything.   Do your homework before you make a major commitment.  Ask proper questions and make sure that a recommendation is not too good to be true.

Subscribe to DailyClout so you never miss an update!

• Email*

Δ

Ellen Danforth is a wife, mother, and grandmother. She has worked in museums and libraries and is a WarRoom/DailyClout Pfizer Documents Analysis Project volunteer.

Spread the Word