By Anne Dachel
Dr. Larry Palevsky is a board certified Pediatrician practicing in New York and a well-advocate for medical freedom and outspoken about the health care corruption. I’ve written about him in the past: August 22, 2020, Dr. Larry Palevsky February Presentation to CT Assembly on the Nightmare in Connecticut I was on a podcast called Progressive Commentary hour with him and Brian Hooker in 2015.
Oct 26, 2020, Dr. Palevsky and the Truth about COVID 19
In the first part of the interview, Dr. Palevsky explains how viruses work, and then he explains what wrong with the COVID scenario, and raises serious questions about what authorities are telling us is true.
Dr. Larry Palevsky on COVID 19 and the planned pandemic
At 16: 15 The subject of censorship is talked brought up.
Why are medical doctors and health professionals around the world being censored for challenging the official narrative?
At 17:35 Dr. Palevsky responds
It’s very interesting when people start raising the idea that medical information and scientific information are being censored.
I remember in early March of 2020 when a physician taking care of patients who were presenting with SARS-CoV-2 virus, and he was seeing that the description of a viral illness didn’t fit with how they were presenting and what they were needing as far as medical care, oxygen, no ventilation vs ventilation and he spoke out in a YouTube video and it went worldwide.
There were other doctors all around the world who spoke out about it and said, “Wait a second, this doesn’t present like a real viral illness. There’s something different about this. We need to be treating it differently than the way we’re being told to treat it.”
He was censored and other physicians were censored, and it made many of us in the medical community step back and say, “Why are we being forced to speak a narrative that isn’t consistent with what we’re seeing in the field, in the clinical situation.
So it raised a big question mark for a lot of people: Why would scientific information be censored? Here we have a viral illness that we’re being told is a viral illness, and yet doctors around the world have been treating thousands of patients with two medications that treat parasites.
Why would a drug like hydroxchloroquine and a drug like ivermectin, both of which treat parasitic infections, why would the use of those drugs in the early stages of a SARS-CoV-2 infection make patients so much better so quickly?
If this is a virus, why would medications that treat parasites make patients improve? So even asking the question is going to be censored.
Somehow we’ve allowed ourselves to swallow this information that a respiratory virus is now working to give us a blood disorder and clotting factors that are making people sick, when no one has really explained the mechanism by which that happens.
We’re just accepting, oh it’s a virus. It must be a virus, when yet there are many other things that could explain this including hydrogen cyanide, electro—magnetic radiation or some parasites when inhaled or ingested that could be leading to some of the clinical symptoms that we’re seeing.
The problem is that the medical community is not thinking, we’re just accepting. The scientific community is not thinking, it’s just accepting.
We’re not really talking about viruses, we’re not talking about what viruses are and what they aren’t, what they can and can’t do.
We’re also not talking about the fact that the leading physician in the NIAID, Anthony Fauci, participated in support of research on coronavirus to do “gain-of-function” research on coronavirus—not just any virus—coronavirus.
What that means is, he knows, and many know, that the virus is a benign illness. Virus doesn’t cause much of an infection. It’s not very virulent, doesn’t create much of a problem in the body. Doing gain-of-function research takes the benign virus and does something to it to make it more virulent, to make it more infectious, to make people get sick more from it.
I really want to reiterate he wasn’t doing gain-of-function research on any virus. He was doing gain-of-function research on coronavirus.
And then Bill Gates and Johns Hopkins University prepared a simulation pandemic in New York City in October of 2019 in the event of a pandemic. But not just on any virus, specifically coronavirus.
And then miraculously we have an outbreak of a coronavirus. And then on top of that, it’s giving people symptoms that are not anywhere near consistent with the way viruses behave in the body.
Then you have Anthony Fauci, in January of 2017, saying to Georgetown University at a dinner that there will be a surprise outbreak during the Trump administration.
Now I’m sorry, “a surprise outbreak” is no longer a surprise. It actually sounds like it’s a plan.
Is it possible that this ‘pandemic’ is actually a “PLAN-demic”?
What is a medical doctor or a scientist or even a lay person supposed when we see that the illness that people are getting with COVID 19 is supposed to be a coronavirus infection, and yet it’s not even close to being consistent with the way coronavirus operates in the body?
What is a medical doctor or a scientist or a lay person supposed when he or she finds out that Anthony Fauci is quoted in January of 2017 at a Georgetown University dinner saying there will be a surprise outbreak during the Trump administration.
Every time these questions have been raised, people have been censored. When we’ve talked about the use of two anti-parasite drugs effectively helping as a treatment for people who got sick early on and they got better really quickly.
Why is that information censored?
Why are the questions that I ask censored?
It makes us wonder if dissenting opinion is no longer welcome in society. And then one has to wonder, well, what kind of society are we living in where a give and take of different ideas or dissenting ideas and opinions are not welcome in the mainstream media?
The next question: What can we do about it?
One of the things I think is needed in our society at this time on this planet on this earth right now is for people to keep an open mind, to critically think and to not be convinced of how certain they are about the information that they’ve been given.
In my understanding of knowledge there three ways of knowing things:
One is intuition. Two is though what people tell you is true. And three by you discovering the truth and knowledge on your own, through your own research and through your own experience.
We are losing one and three. We are losing our ability to use our intuition. We’re losing our ability to critically think, to discover answers and to do our own research and have our own experiences.
We are watching a society and a world where the only thing that we know to be true is what our authorities tell us to be true.
We are externalizing our authority. We are externalizing our power. We’re giving it up to false gods and false prophets who we are trusting to guide us and take care of us properly. But the information doesn’t seem consistent with being able to trust of all of what they’re saying.
So I am asking people to give up their certainty, to be okay with doubt, to be okay with unknown, to be willing to learn things that are either new for them or opposite to what they thought they knew. But don’t learn it because I, as an expert, might say it to you.
Learn it because you thought it through, because you discussed it, because you worked it through, because you tried to look at things from all angles.
You were willing to be wrong and willing to grow into greater information and greater truth than what was handed to you by the authorities to whom you gave your power.
Anne Dachel is Media Editor for Age of Autism.