- Doctors who successfully used early COVID-19 treatments like ivermectin faced severe backlash and censorship from medical and government authorities
- Hospitals repeatedly blocked effective interventions, putting patients at unnecessary risk by ignoring treatments that could have prevented severe illness
- Over 38,000 deaths linked to COVID shots were reported in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), yet health authorities downplayed these numbers
- Health care professionals experienced threats to their medical licenses simply for advocating patient-centered treatments and sharing honest clinical results
- Taking control of your medical freedom means knowing your rights, documenting your decisions, and actively choosing doctors who prioritize your health over politics
(Mercola)—Trust in hospitals and health institutions is sharply declining because of how the health care industry has handled the COVID-19 pandemic. From forced treatments to draconic lockdown mandates, people all over the world suffered greatly. Even doctors who figured out effective treatments that helped save lives were vilified for spreading “misinformation.”
One such case is Dr. Mary Talley Bowden, a Texas-based physician who has treated COVID-19 patients during the height of the pandemic. During her time working in a hospital setting, she observed firsthand how patients recovered quickly using treatments such as ivermectin and monoclonal antibodies. All of this, and more, was discussed in her interview with Tucker Carlson featured above.
Why Vaccine Safety Suddenly Became a Political Battlefield
Getting vaccinated was once viewed as a straightforward part of health care. You’d go your doctor, get your shot, and move on with life, confident you’d done the right thing for your health. While many have criticized vaccinations and their adverse effects on human health, the arrival of the SARS-CoV-2 virus put the entire field under the watchful eyes of the public.
Now, getting the shot isn’t just a health care choice — it’s deeply entwined with politics. Doctors who tried treating their patients with methods outside the official rules faced intense backlash. Bowden shares her side of the story:
- Early treatment is crucial — Using drugs like ivermectin and monoclonal antibodies, she successfully helped thousands of patients recover quickly and fully. Recounting her experience in 2021:
“[M]onoclonal antibodies came about, and those worked great. I mean, I could get as many doses I wanted. I’d get them the next day. I’d just contact the manufacturer, say, I need 200 doses to be at my doorstep. Great. They worked wonderfully. People turned around very quickly.”
- Authorities pushed back against treatments that worked — One reason is that these early treatments undermined the vaccine-focused public health strategy. Powerful organizations insisted vaccines were the only real solution, dismissing alternatives. If patients could recover fully without the vaccine, fewer people would rush to get vaccinated, and Big Pharma wouldn’t like that.
“So this is following the rollout of the COVID shots. The government is upset because people are not buying it. People are not getting them. There’s very low uptake, very low interest. There’s suspicion of these shots,” Bowden says.
“So in March, they started their PR campaign. The government, they went after ivermectin. The FDA put something on their website about, you can’t use ivermectin for COVID. Biden doled out $11.5 billion to groups around the country. Initially, it started with 275.
It went up to 17,000 influencers, church groups, sports leagues, all sorts of people just funneling out taxpayer money to go after doctors like myself that were spreading ‘misinformation’ and to push people to get these COVID shots.”
Early Treatment Improves Outcomes, but Hospitals Denied It
The tragedy of COVID is how many lives were lost unnecessarily because early treatment was denied. Doctors learned quickly that COVID often became severe around day eight. If patients weren’t treated immediately, their chances of survival dropped significantly. But instead of acting early, many hospitals waited until patients became critically ill — by then, often too late.
- Bowden’s experiences illustrate the same tragedy — She tells the story of a sheriff’s deputy in Texas who became severely ill with COVID-19. His family begged the hospital to try ivermectin, a safe drug with decades of use.
“This is a man that has served for 29 years trying to protect and save the public. Father of six. And he contracted COVID. And this was in the fall of 2021. And that was the third and the largest surge of the pandemic. That’s when this was following the rollout of the COVID shots.
So, this was eight months following the rollout of COVID shots, and they clearly weren’t working. And this man, he got sick. He tried to get ivermectin. He couldn’t find a doctor willing to prescribe it. He ended up in the hospital, and he went downhill like so many people did,” Bowden said.
- Getting early treatment is crucial — Bowden noted that early treatment meant the difference between life and death. Patients treated early typically made a full recovery. She shares one story of a former patient:
“Everybody that got early treatment survived. I even had some really, really sick people come in in the second and third week. So, second, third week is when the inflammatory cascades set in and people get really sick.
I had a man come in with oxygen saturation in the 60s, and he was not a healthy guy. He had a history of a heart attack. He had a history of throat cancer. He was a veteran … But I had nurses that could do IVs, so we gave him high-dose steroids and IV.
We gave him antibiotics, breathing treatments, high-dose IV, vitamin C. We gave him high-dose ivermectin and we brought him in every day as an outpatient because I didn’t have a hospital bed in my office. He survived. And I had a lot [of patients] like that.”
- Only a few hospitals were open to lifesaving treatments — Bowden shared that Houston’s United Memorial Medical Center allowed ivermectin early on, saving countless lives. That’s because Dr. Joseph Varon, president of the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC), worked there.
“This hospital, UMMC, allowed him to use ivermectin. There was a whole protocol called the MATH+ protocol, started by FLCCC, which is now Independent Medical Alliance.
It included high-dose steroids, high-dose ivermectin, high-dose vitamin C, breathing treatments — all these very basic, not dangerous things that weren’t being done elsewhere. He saved a lot of lives. He worked crazy hours — I think he worked over two and a half years straight without even a break. I was fortunate to have him as an ally,” she says.
Why would hospitals deny these treatments? The only answer that makes sense is profit. Hospitals received substantial funding tied specifically to following federal treatment guidelines, which did not include drugs like ivermectin. This funding was critical, outweighing patient care techniques that actually worked.
Doctors Who Speak Out Face Harsh Consequences
As noted earlier, Bowden has seen plenty of vaccine-related injuries firsthand. Many patients experienced symptoms they’d never had before, such as tremors, neurological problems, sudden heart issues, and severe fatigue. However, the system fought hard to suppress her right to free speech.
- Authorities are trying to silence Bowden by taking her license — Bowden, despite her successful patient outcomes, found herself portrayed as irresponsible or even dangerous. She shares with Carlson:
“I’m still fighting to keep my license. I mean, I still have the Texas Medical Board coming after me …”
Big Tech amplified censorship — Companies who ran social media platforms banned doctors who spoke about their successful COVID treatments. Like many others, Bowden was banned from then-Twitter. Even Carlson has had to compromise with Big Tech to maintain his platform. He says:
“So, one of the primary platforms we use for distribution is YouTube, which, in general, has been great, actually, if I’m being honest. A lot less censorship than I got in any television job I ever had. So, we’re really grateful to YouTube. I never thought I’d say that.
But the one area where we get censored by YouTube is when we talk about COVID shots, which I think is really interesting. So, this will probably be censored on YouTube.”
- Safety data was supposed to be for the public’s protection — Instead, it was hidden or ignored. The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) has historically been a critical early warning system, and when adverse reactions spike, authorities usually pause or investigate the medication immediately. But during COVID, the huge surge in vaccine-related injuries prompted no action at all. Bowden shares her experience:
“According to VAERS, there have been 38,000 deaths from these COVID shots. So, under normal circumstances, the FDA would have pulled it, but instead they’ve doubled down. They put the shots on the childhood vaccine schedule. All babies are expected to get three COVID shots by the time they’re 9 months old.”
Take Control of Your Medical Freedom
Why is silencing a dissenting doctor a matter of concern? Because this puts your health at risk. When a doctor is unable to openly discuss innovative treatments, your ability to make informed health decisions will suffer.
If you’re concerned about how politics continue to interfere with health care practitioners, you’re not alone. Fortunately, there are ways for you to take control of your medical freedom. Here’s what I recommend you do to protect yourself and your loved ones:
1. Educate yourself about your rights — Learn exactly what you’re entitled to when you visit hospitals or doctors. You have the right to refuse any medical treatment and to ask detailed questions about all options. Know these rights well and clearly state them whenever you seek care. Your decisions will guide doctors toward your desired health goals — not theirs.
2. Document everything clearly — Keep accurate records of your medical history, conversations with doctors, and treatments you’re receiving or refusing. If you’re ever hospitalized, having these detailed records helps ensure your decisions are respected. Clearly documented notes make it harder for medical providers or hospitals to ignore your wishes. Bowden also mentions this in her interview:
“If you have to go to the hospital, be prepared. Have somebody with you … There is a patient bill of rights. You have rights in the hospital. Make sure you know those rights.”
I encourage you to print out the Caregivers and Consent document so hospital staff know what they can and cannot do to you, and they are legally required to respect your decisions. For more information on this topic, read “How to Save Your Life and Those You Love When Hospitalized.”
3. Build relationships with doctors who respect your choices — Find health care providers who openly discuss all treatment options and not just those officially approved.
If you’re someone who’s skeptical about certain medical advice, find a doctor who listens, respects your concerns, and works with you. A good relationship with an open-minded doctor helps you feel safer and makes you less vulnerable to pressure from hospitals or authorities.
4. Seek alternative care options when necessary — If you’re being denied care that you believe will help you, don’t hesitate to look elsewhere. Find independent clinics, direct primary care doctors, or specialists like Dr. Bowden who advocate for patients first.
Being proactive and choosing providers who prioritize patient-centered care helps you avoid hospitals that may prioritize political or financial incentives over your health.
5. Stay informed and speak up — Educate yourself about medical news, research, and treatment options, particularly from doctors who have demonstrated success but are often censored. Share credible information you’ve learned with your friends and family and speak out clearly whenever you encounter misinformation or censorship.
Your voice matters — speaking up helps protect everyone’s right to medical freedom and accurate health information.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) About the Politicizing of Health Care
Q: Why is trust in hospitals declining?
A: Trust in hospitals has sharply declined due to the handling of COVID-19, including forced treatments, strict lockdown mandates, and suppression of effective alternative treatments. Hospitals prioritized federal funding and vaccine mandates over individualized patient care, which led to unnecessary deaths.
Q: Were early COVID-19 treatments effective?
A: Yes, according to Dr. Mary Talley Bowden, early treatment with ivermectin, monoclonal antibodies, high-dose steroids, and vitamin C significantly improved patient outcomes. Patients who received these treatments early, even when severely ill, often recovered fully, highlighting the crucial role of early intervention.
Q: Why did authorities discourage treatments like ivermectin?
A: Authorities discouraged ivermectin and similar treatments because these successful, low-cost alternatives threatened the jab-focused strategy promoted by government and Big Pharma. Authorities actively suppressed these treatments to maintain demand for COVID-19 shots, spending substantial public resources to label alternative treatments as misinformation.
Q: What consequences did doctors face for speaking out about alternative treatments?
A: Doctors advocating for alternative COVID treatments faced intense backlash, censorship, threatened loss of medical licenses, and defamation. Big Tech platforms banned discussions of these treatments, and doctors like Dr. Bowden faced medical board investigations, illustrating the colluding censorship between the government and Big Pharma.
Q: How can I protect my medical freedom?
A: You can protect your medical freedom by educating yourself about patient rights, documenting medical decisions thoroughly, building relationships with doctors who respect patient choices, seeking alternative care when needed, and speaking out against misinformation and censorship.
Bypass Big Tech Censors
Two Storms, One Harvest
Every food crisis in living memory has been a one-shock event. The 2008 price spike was a commodity bubble. The 2020 shortages were a logistics failure. The 2022 grain scare was a war on one exporter’s ports. Each time, the system bent, adjusted, and recovered, and each time the experts assured us afterward that global markets are simply too big and too diversified to fail.
What nobody in Washington seems eager to discuss is that 2026 is shaping up to be something the modern food system has never actually faced. Two independent shocks, one climatic and one geopolitical, are converging on the same harvest cycle at the same time. Not sequentially. Simultaneously.
Start with the weather. The Pacific Ocean is currently building toward what forecasters now openly call a record event. NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center puts the odds of at least a strong El Niño near 88 percent, with roughly two in three odds it reaches “very strong” status, the tier reserved for perhaps three or four events in the entire satellite era. Every major global model now projects a median peak in Super El Niño territory, and most of them project it exceeding the 2015-16 event, which until now held the modern record. Sea surface anomalies were already brushing the super threshold in mid-July, months before these events normally peak. The atmosphere has already shifted into El Niño mode, and the event is forecast to crest in late fall and early winter.
This is not about “climate change.” It’s about the standard cycles of weather, and the cycle we’re currently in is one that has likely devastated societies in the past. We’re better prepared as a society today, but not all Americans are equally prepared.
Serious households have started doing the quiet math on their own. Grocery bills tell part of the story, and the forecast maps tell the rest, which is why long-term food storage has moved from fringe hobby to mainstream line item in the family budget, with established suppliers like Heaven’s Harvest seeing demand from people who five years ago would have rolled their eyes at the idea. That instinct is not paranoia. It is pattern recognition, and the pattern is worth walking through carefully.
Editor’s Note: Heaven’s Harvest IS a sponsor, but the warnings of this article are real and would be written even if we didn’t have a survival food sponsor. With that said, those who take advantage of what they offer can use promo code “Patriot” for 15% off.
The Fertilizer Clock Is Already Running
While the Pacific warms, the second shock has been unfolding in the Strait of Hormuz. The conflict with Iran turned the world’s most important energy chokepoint into a contested waterway, and the consequences reach far beyond the gas pump. Roughly a third of global fertilizer trade moves through Hormuz, and the disruption sent urea prices up 86 percent year over year by March, with a 53 percent jump in a single month.
The World Bank projects energy prices rising about 24 percent in 2026 and fertilizer about 31 percent. By its own accounting, fertilizer prices ran 35 percent higher in the first five months of this year than the same period last year.
Here is the mechanism the nightly news will not explain. Fertilizer is not a grocery item. It is a time-delayed input. The nitrogen a farmer in Iowa or Punjab could not afford to apply this spring does not show up as a problem this spring. It shows up as a thinner harvest six to twelve months later.
The World Bank’s own food security brief concedes that the effects of reduced applications earlier this season “are likely to become visible only later in harvest outcomes.” Translate that from institutional language into plain English and it means this. The damage is already done, it is already in the ground, and we are simply waiting for it to arrive on the shelf.
Now check the calendar. Six to twelve months from the spring planting season lands us squarely in late 2026 and early 2027. Which is precisely when the strongest El Niño in the instrumental record is forecast to peak, bringing its signature droughts to Southeast Asia, Australia, southern Africa, northern Brazil, and South Asia, the very regions that grow the world’s rice, sugar, and oilseeds.
The World Bank warns openly that a strong El Niño “could disrupt multiple crop belts simultaneously” on top of the conflict-driven input costs. Their baseline projection assumes the Middle East disruptions ease by autumn. What in the last two years of Middle East history suggests that assumption is safe?
The System Has No Slack Left
The comfortable answer is that global markets always adjust. But adjustment requires slack, and the slack is gone. Global cereal production is expected to decline from last year’s records even before El Niño does its work. The UN World Food Programme, hardly a den of right-wing preppers, is calling this the most significant disruption to its supply chains since Covid and the invasion of Ukraine, and its supply chain director put the stakes bluntly.
Today’s supply chain challenges are tomorrow’s hunger crisis.
There is also a political dimension that markets cannot price. When food gets scarce, governments do not behave like economists. They behave like politicians. Export bans, hoarding mandates, and panic buying at the national level turned the modest rice shortfall of 2008 into a global crisis, and analysts are already warning that import-dependent nations are the first dominoes.
The 2015-16 Super El Niño, a far weaker event than what is now forecast, threw tens of millions into food stress across Africa and Asia. This one is projected to be stronger, and it arrives with fertilizer already rationed by price and shipping lanes already contested by missiles.
What Joseph Knew
Scripture does not treat preparation for lean years as faithlessness. It treats it as wisdom delivered in advance to those willing to act on it.
Behold, there come seven years of great plenty throughout all the land of Egypt: And there shall arise after them seven years of famine; and all the plenty shall be forgotten in the land of Egypt.
Joseph did not respond to that warning with a hashtag or a committee. He stored grain during the years of abundance, and when the famine came, Egypt stood while its neighbors begged. The lesson is not that famine is certain. It is that the time to prepare is precisely when preparation still looks optional.
Nobody who filled a pantry in a year of plenty has ever regretted it, and nobody standing in an empty aisle has ever been glad he waited for certainty.
None of this calls for panic, and panic is the enemy of sound judgment anyway. It calls for the same unglamorous prudence our grandparents considered ordinary. Keep some cash margin, know your local growers, and put real food in deep storage while it is cheap and available, because the entire arc of this story is that cheap and available is a closing window.
Families looking for a straightforward place to start can visit Heaven’s Harvest and use promo code Patriot for 15 percent off long-term storable food. The forecasts may yet soften, the strait may yet reopen, and we should pray they do. But hope is a fine thing to hold and a foolish thing to eat.
