On Aug. 25th, Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro held a press conference announcing two “measles-related” deaths in unvaccinated residents of Lancaster County. His carefully chosen words served the intended purpose.The story, framed as murder, ignited into headline news, and all fingers pointed to Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Donald Trump as the perpetrators.

As the fear-mongering narrative spread like wildfire, sanity emerged from the ashes. Forty-eight hours following Shapiro’s announcement, Lancaster County Commissioner Josh Parsons, backed by Coroner Dr. Stephen Diamantoni, publicly refuted Shapiro’s claims. Contrary to what Shapiro stated, an infant (who happened to have measles antibodies), died during home childbirth due to a laceration of the spleen. The other “measles-associated” death remains a complete mystery to both the Coroner and Commissioner Parsons. Normally, the Coroner would be informed and involved in a death due to measles; one could presume the information was fabricated since he wasn’t.

The alternate version of events eventually made it to NBC, Fox News, and even the New York Times, but the damage was already done. Sadly, even the country’s highest infectious disease authority - the CDC - digested and dispersed Shapiro’s announcement without question; days later, it had to sheepishly concede important details are missing. As of the time of this writing, the CDC still can’t confirm what actually happened, using an asterisk on its website to designate number of deaths from measles in 2026.

We’ve seen this playbook before, and rest assured, the hysteria had nothing to do with measles and nothing to do with health. A peek behind the curtain reveals a well-funded political hit job, a fear-campaign intended to discredit Trump and Kennedy in preparation for the upcoming midterm elections.

Moments after Shapiro’s press conference, Democrat activist group Protect Our Care declared “Trump and RFK Jr.’s Anti-Vax Crusade Just Got Two Pennsylvanians Killed.” President of Protect Our Care and former DNC communications director Brad Woodhouse issued an emotional fatwa against Trump and Kennedy:

“Two families are burying their loved ones because of Donald Trump and RFK Jr. Full stop. The two most powerful men in American health policy have fueled a measles outbreak in this country by turning their backs on more than half a century of sound science in favor of bullshit conspiracy theories. Trump and RFK Jr. have caused vaccination rates to drop and sparked the worst national measles crisis in three decades. RFK Jr. spent a career manufacturing doubt about the MMR shot, and now he and Trump have only amplified this anti-science, dangerous rhetoric. It’s been one anti-vax stunt after another as they’ve thrown out settled science and replaced it with pure junk, gambling with people’s lives in the process. Now two more people are dead, and it’s not The Paradox Pressclose to over. Trump and RFK Jr. have blood on their hands, and every day they refuse to reverse course, they’re daring it to happen again. Mr. Kennedy, fucking resign already.”

Protect Our Care sits under the umbrella of far-left nonprofit The Sixteen Thirty Fund, a Soros-backed PAC with revenue of over $280 million in 2024. Shortly after Trump’s Aug.10th Executive Order on vaccines, Protect Our Care and another very well-funded healthcare PAC, 314 Action, joined forces to poll 525 registered voters on their attitudes toward vaccines. Whereas Protect Our Care is backed by Soros, 314 Action is backed by a slew of other equally powerful entities, including AIPAC.

The questions posed in the poll were framed to elicit the correct responses, and with glee, on August 19th, Protect Our Care concluded“Voters Overwhelmingly Support Childhood Vaccinations, Strongly Oppose President Trump Changing Vaccine Schedule, and Say They View Republicans Less Favorably Because of It.” According to the poll, not only are vaccines safe and effective, anyone questioning them will be voted out of office.

The President of Protect Our Care, Brad Woodhouse, promptly hosted vaccine-enthusiast Paul Offit on his podcast to discuss the results. While pontificating on the consequences of questioning vaccines, Offit accidentally showed his cards by mentioning Governor Shapiro’s “correct stance” on vaccines. This slip occurred six days before Shapiro’s press conference; did Offit and others withhold knowledge of the deaths until Shapiro could announce? Six days later, Gov. Shapiro and the Pennsylvania Department of Health stood in front of a sea of cameras to frame measles - and vaccine refusal - as the cause of death of two Pennsylvanians. Why did Offit mention Shapiro during that podcast six days earlier if he didn’t know what was about to transpire?

The setting and timing of Shapiro’s press conference were no coincidence, and the message was far from sincere. Beyond politics, the financial stakes motivating Shapiro are high. Pennsylvania is ground-zero for US vaccine manufacturers (50% of vaccines in the US are manufactured in the state), and just two months prior, Gov. Shapiro handed vaccine manufacturer Sanofi Pasteur a $10.6M grant for flu shots. Shapiro has boasted that GlaxoSmithKline’s vaccine plant in Marietta, Pennsylvania is “the largest Commonwealth-supported economic development project in Lancaster County history,” and the Shapiro administration has documented over $5.5B in state-backed pharmaceutical programs. Relevant details like this would be nice to know when a government official takes a controversial stance surrounding a heated issue like vaccines. Other industries require it, but politicians are allowed to lie by omission.

This story is still fresh, still unresolved, but the hoped-for outcome seems upended - amazing considering the immense powers in play. Millions of dollars, multiple PACs, a revered public health expert, and a Governor with Presidential aspirations joined forces, exploiting the deaths of two Americans in an attempt to take down the two most controversial politicians in office. But thanks to Commissioner Josh Parsons, Coroner Dr. Stephen Diamantoni, and a handful of independent journalists and their followers, their mission not only failed but completely backfired. If the present momentum continues, Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro will go down in history as the man responsible for completely discrediting the pro-vaccine movement. And miraculously, the victory didn’t cost anything - all it took was integrity, courage and truth.

Support independent journalists and subscribe to The Paradox Press, who commissioned me to write this article.

PERSONNEL ISSUES

• Board President Sherif Zaafran is enmeshed in controversy. Sherif gained his position after donating $85,000 to Gov Abbott. He and his wife Tara are founding members of ISNA (Islamic Society of North America), an organization the DOJ has linked to Hamas. Sherif omitted this information from his CV. In that light, he has advocated for easier licensing of foreign-trained doctors (the DOCTOR Act) while lecturing foreign students on how to get a spot in an American medical school or residency position. He is a board member of the Federation of State Medical Boards (FSMB), an organization that directed all state medical boards to investigate doctors for spreading “misinformation” during the pandemic. Sherif is a leader of U.S. Anesthesia Partners (USAP); the FTC sued USAP in 2023 for rolling up Texas anesthesia practices, suppressing competition, and driving up prices (“price gouging”). The case against USAP is on-going.

• 17% of TMB board members have themselves been disciplined by TMB (vs. 0.07% of Texas physicians) and disciplinary measures were light compared to what other physicians experience. Dr. Devinder S. Bhatia received only a remedial plan after assaulting a nurse. Dr. Satish Nayak was disciplined for inadequate / poor medical record-keeping. Perhaps they kept their board positions because Bhatia donated $31,000 and Nayak donated $38,920 to Abbott.

• Board Medical Director Dr. Robert Bredt worked as a lab director for Planned Parenthood the entire 12 years he worked for TMB. This was only exposed when he was recruited to testify against me and had to submit his CV. He resigned as soon as this became public.

• TMB just hired attorney Judd Stone to represent them in their case against me and Ken Paxton. Stone faces multiple sexual-harassment allegations (including claims of violent rape fantasies, screaming at staff, and prior investigations by Sen. Ted Cruz and Ken Paxton). Stone worked as Chief Counsel for Ted Cruz but departed one month after the Cruz launched an investigation against him. Stone was asked to leave after Paxton’s investigation. Stone now has a personal vendetta against Ken Paxton and presumably is seeking revenge by representing TMB against him. I am caught in the middle.

• Pay to play: Multiple TMB members have donated to Abbott; seven members together gave at least $393,103. Arun Agarwal donated $196,758, Sherif Zaafran donated $85,000 and member Michael Cokinos donated $32,500 to Abbott; his brother Greg Cokinos is a donor/supporter of the judge who recently ruled against me. Devinder Bhatia, the surgeon reprimanded for assaulting a nurse, donated $31,000 to both Gov Abbott and Dan Patrick.

DUE PROCESS ISSUES

• TMB filed complaints against me without contacting key witnesses or investigating first, violating due process. This was established during depositions of witnesses.

• TMB issued a public reprimand against me without finding a single medical expert to testify. Board paid two experts $30,844 (far above the 2023 average expert fee of $4,096.94) to testify; both dropped out—one after becoming ill, the other after withdrawing over “public developments” and fear of becoming a target. A third intended expert, TMB medical director Dr. Robert Bredt, resigned after his Planned Parenthood work became public.

• Public member Sharon Barnes, who presided over my informal settlement conference, circulated news stories about me to the full board before any official complaint. In later text messages after the informal conference, another member (DeLoach) told Barnes “Don’t” when Barnes appeared ready to share more opinions about Bowden, and separately joked that Barnes was “in the pocket of big pharma.” If a juror behaved this way, they would be disqualified, but Barnes was allowed to determine my fate.

• Average TMB complaint resolution: 292 days. TMB deposed my final and most important witness 1,209 days after filing the complaint — and that was the Board’s first conversation with that witness.

• Prior to the administrative judges ordering a public reprimand there were three continuances.

• During the final hearing in front of the board, my attorneys were blocked from entering the Zoom meeting, and I testified without knowing they weren’t present. We were denied a rehearing.

TRANSPARENCY AND RECORDS ISSUES

• Withholding records after the AG’s office already said they should be released
  I asked Paxton’s Open Records Division to investigate TMB for PIA violations. One fight was over expert-witness invoices and how often TMB had used that expert. TMB’s lawyers invoked litigation and confidentiality exceptions to keep those documents back. Paxton ruled in my favor, and TMB had to turn over the expert-witness invoices.

• Fighting Sen. Bob Hall’s request for complaint files
  Sen. Bob Hall asked for the file of every doctor who received a complaint that was not closed without further investigation from Jan. 1, 2020 onward. The Open Records office ruled for Hall. TMB then sued Ken Paxton and kept fighting to keep those complaint files secret.

• Charging high fees to create a barrier
  In a two-week span TMB invoiced me $2,257.50 just to respond to open-records requests. I complained to Paxton, who decided to investigate. Those fees are an attempt to make requests expensive rather than comply.

• Using unofficial channels that are hard to request
  TMB President Sherif Zaafran uses WhatsApp. I’ve been told her prefers WhatsApp to avoid FOIA.

• On Dec. 30, 2024 I posted I had proof TMB violated the Open Records Act and asked Paxton to investigate. Dallas Express reported the companion letters: one asking Paxton to look at retaliation and a “randomized” CME audit (48 doctors, smallest batch in six years, nine days after I was questioned about CME in a deposition); another to Open Records chief Justin Gordon asking for a PIA investigation into withheld expert-pay and expert-use records.

• My Open Records claim is not one missing document. It is a pattern: withhold first, assert exceptions, charge large fees, fight even after an AG ruling, and keep official talk off searchable government email.

Governor Abbott has turned a blind eye to this corruption. Let him know you want change:

https://gov.texas.gov/apps/contact/opinion

Witt-Doerring reports that for roughly 80 percent of cases involving anxiety, depression, or insomnia, patients can discontinue medications without major issues. More complex conditions such as bipolar disorder or schizophrenia present greater challenges, and some individuals elect to remain on treatment. He notes a growing network of clinicians, including Mark Horowitz in the UK and participants in deprescribing mentorship programs, who share this holistic orientation.

The conversation centered on Lindsay Clancy, a Massachusetts mother charged with killing her three young children in early 2023. Initially, many viewed the act as pure evil warranting imprisonment. Witt-Doerring contends the medical record supports a finding of not guilty by reason of insanity due to medication-induced psychosis. After her third child, Clancy experienced postpartum depression and life stresses. Telemedicine providers prescribed Zoloft, an SSRI; she developed severe insomnia, the dose was doubled, symptoms worsened, and it was stopped. She was later placed on Prozac, then Seroquel, and eventually amitriptyline, with the dose increased the day before the tragedy. In a short period she was exposed to approximately 11 medications.

Drug labels explicitly warn that antidepressants can precipitate mania and psychosis. Clancy later reported command auditory hallucinations. Collateral evidence includes text messages in which she described the drugs damaging her brain and making her feel worse, disclosure of intrusive homicidal thoughts to family weeks earlier, and forensic analysis of her computer searches for medication side effects. Family, friends, colleagues, and her nanny described her as a loving mother with no history of violence, substance abuse, or relational breakdown—the typical motives in filicide cases. The prosecution’s theories of psychopathy or “altruistic filicide” appear inconsistent with this background. Witt-Doerring highlights parallel malpractice concerns over continued antidepressant prescribing despite clear worsening.

He cites legal precedents. In the Donald Schell case, a man with a prior adverse reaction to Prozac was prescribed Paxil and, within days, killed his wife, daughter, and granddaughter before taking his own life; a jury found the manufacturer liable for failure to warn. In Canada, David Carmichael killed his son while experiencing Paxil-induced delusions and was not prosecuted for murder after authorities accepted the drug-induced psychosis explanation.

Witt-Doerring underscores broader risks: roughly 17 percent of Americans take SSRIs and about 5 percent are on multiple psychiatric medications. Adverse behavioral effects are more pronounced in younger patients, whose nervous systems continue maturing into the late twenties. High-risk windows include initiation, dose increases, and abrupt discontinuation. SSRI withdrawal, long minimized as mild and self-limiting, proves severe for a substantial minority—surveys indicate that around one-third cannot discontinue because of intolerable symptoms.

He advocates stronger informed consent, clinician education on deprescribing, and greater attention to physical health. Obesity, ultra-processed diets, and sedentary lifestyles contribute heavily to anxiety, depression, and insomnia; treating the body improves the mind. The Clancy case, while tragic, illustrates how rapid polypharmacy and ignored warning signs can produce catastrophic outcomes and why safer, more individualized psychiatric practice is urgently needed.

Follow Dr. Josef on X and visit his clinic website here.

Festa describes the case of three Amish community schools in New York, which faced fines exceeding $150,000 for continuing to accept religious exemptions after the state repealed them in 2019. New York, like California, Connecticut, and Maine, abolished such exemptions for all schools—public, private, and parochial. West Virginia effectively bars them as well. The Amish schools, operating as private religious institutions, allowed families to opt out based on sincerely held beliefs opposing vaccination. After losing at the district court and initially at the Second Circuit, the case was remanded by the Supreme Court in light of Mahmoud v. Taylor (2025), which affirmed parents’ rights to opt children out of certain school curricula on religious grounds, and related rulings extending similar principles to public health contexts. Despite this, the Second Circuit again dismissed the challenge, distinguishing vaccination mandates as less invasive of religious freedom than curricular content—a distinction Festa criticizes, noting that vaccination effects are irreversible while classroom teaching can be countered at home.

We The Patriots is litigating a nearly identical case involving Milford Christian Church and its Little Eagles Preschool in Connecticut. After Connecticut eliminated religious exemptions in 2021, the preschool continued honoring them. State inspectors threatened closure unless unvaccinated children were either vaccinated or expelled. A federal lawsuit filed in 2023 reached oral argument at the Second Circuit in April; a decision is expected imminently and is likely to follow the Amish precedent. Festa anticipates an adverse ruling, after which the firm plans to petition the Supreme Court. A parallel suit was filed in July against a public school district in Turner, Maine, on behalf of an eighth-grader whose parents seek a religious exemption. These cases position the organization to challenge exemptions losses across multiple federal circuits.

Festa explains the strategic focus on religious free exercise rather than a broader bodily autonomy claim. Citing Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which rejected an unenumerated constitutional right to bodily autonomy in the abortion context, he noted that courts have not recognized a general right against compelled medical interventions outside narrow settings. Religious objections often center on the historical use of aborted fetal cell lines in vaccine development and testing, as well as other ingredients or manufacturing processes that conflict with faith-based principles. A Supreme Court victory could establish nationwide precedent protecting parental rights to religious opt-outs, whether limited to religious schools or applied more broadly to all educational settings. Such a ruling would endure far longer than temporary political or executive measures.

Collectively, these cases represent a multi-year campaign to restore religious exemptions and affirm parental authority. Supreme Court review offers the most durable path to protecting these liberties for current and future generations, given the lasting nature of constitutional precedent.

We the Patriots is a pro-bono, non-profit legal firm focusing on medical and religious freedom cases. Register for their upcoming Vaccine Safety Awareness Marathon:

Thorp noted that pregnancy is highly sensitive to inflammation, which can disrupt embryonic development, placentation, and lead to miscarriage, fetal death, and other complications. He referenced historical disasters such as thalidomide and diethylstilbestrol as reminders of the need for caution with unstudied substances. In his view, authorities knew the vaccines were inflammatory and associated with miscarriages but withheld the information, consistent with broader patterns of downplaying vaccine signals.

Thorp offered two strategic reasons for targeting pregnant women. First, women make the majority of healthcare decisions for families across the lifespan; securing their acceptance would influence broader uptake. Second, as the most vulnerable population, their vaccination would signal safety and necessity to everyone else. He described the overall effort as a public-relations campaign led by figures such as Mark Weber at HHS, involving coordination with medical organizations, hospitals, colleges, and state boards.

Professionally, Thorp faced pressure after speaking out. In September 2021, the American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology (ABOG) emailed thousands of obstetricians, warning that failure to follow official guidelines could result in loss of licensure and board certification. Thorp responded with a detailed letter citing peer-reviewed studies, VAERS analyses, and adverse outcome data. He reported no further action against him and continued annual certification. Through a FOIA request filed with his wife, attorney Maggie Thorp, they obtained records indicating financial arrangements between HHS/CDC and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), which then influenced related societies. Thorp argued that physicians were effectively given talking points rather than independent clinical judgment.

Timeline details included the December 2020 vaccine rollout, initial statements that use in pregnancy would be voluntary, rapid uptake among healthcare workers (many pregnant), and subsequent organizational endorsements by mid-2021 culminating in the ABOG threat. Pregnant women were not exempted from workplace mandates. Thorp sharply criticized the April 2021 New England Journal of Medicine paper by Shimabukuro et al. and accompanying commentary, that contradicted VAERS data suggesting an approximately 82% miscarriage rate among completed early pregnancies—similar to figures derived from Pfizer’s post-marketing report of roughly 81% among cases with known outcomes. He also highlighted high overall casualty numbers in that short Pfizer document and questioned data-handling practices such as counting vaccinated status only after 14 days.

Clinically, Thorp described observing no unusual patterns in 2020 among the thousands of high-risk pregnancies he managed, followed by sharp increases after vaccine rollout: severe menstrual irregularities across age groups, infertility, later miscarriages with heavy bleeding, fetal malformations (including rare conditions like diaphragmatic hernia appearing in clusters), cervical insufficiency, placental abnormalities, growth restriction, thrombotic events, preterm delivery, and higher neonatal intensive-care admissions. Colleagues largely remained silent, he said, after seeing professional consequences for those who raised concerns. He attributed institutional compliance partly to substantial federal funding received by hospital systems under agreements that limited disclosure.

Thorp has documented these issues in his book Sacrifice: How the Deadliest Vaccine in History Targeted the Most Vulnerable, with proceeds supporting vaccine-injured individuals, and has a new Christian devotional forthcoming. The interview underscores his contention that early official awareness of risks to pregnant women was subordinated to a broader vaccination campaign, with lasting clinical and institutional effects.

Follow Dr. Thorp on X @jathorpmfm and drjamesthorp.com.

Australian authorities had severely restricted ivermectin prescribing by general practitioners, limiting it to specialists for approved indications and citing concerns about supply for conditions such as scabies in Aboriginal communities. Hydroxychloroquine had faced earlier and stricter limits. Official guidance for diagnosed COVID patients emphasized isolation at home under daily health-officer checks, with only paracetamol recommended and pulse-oximeter monitoring; patients were directed to hospital if their condition worsened. Trinh, having researched early treatments and followed clinicians associated with groups such as the COVID Medical Network, chose to offer ivermectin-based regimens via telehealth to patients confined by health orders.

Regulators treated the dual notifications as grounds for an emergency hearing, determining she posed a risk to the public and suspending her registration the same day. Nearly five years later she remains unable to practice or provide medical advice. She pursued appeals, a judicial review, and proceedings through the tribunal and higher courts, only to encounter procedural complications when arguments were altered under pressure. Concurrently the Health Care Complaints Commission investigated and prosecuted her for unsatisfactory professional conduct and professional misconduct, including failure to surrender records of 20–30 patients—records she withheld on independent legal advice that the request lacked proper authority. In mid-2025 she was found guilty at the first stage of proceedings; the second stage, concerning sanctions, remains pending while she has filed a fresh appeal and judicial review in the Supreme Court.

Trinh acknowledges she could have submitted and ended the matter more quickly. She has instead continued the fight, citing the need to defend the principle that doctors may exercise clinical judgment, including legitimate off-label prescribing once recognized even by health ministers early in the pandemic. The experience has been deeply traumatic, leaving her uncertain whether she will ever return to practice. Her account illustrates the intensity of regulatory responses to early-treatment approaches in Australia, the speed with which suspension can occur, and the protracted, costly legal processes that follow when a practitioner contests the outcome.

Follow Dr. Trinh on X @myletrinh123 and donate to her legal fund here.

McCairn, who has treated approximately 25 patients, describes vaccine injuries linked to abnormal amyloid and mis-folded proteins, often triggered by spike protein. These cause widespread microclots, autoimmune responses, brain fog, extreme fatigue, heart irregularities, neuropathy, and organ damage. Many patients arrive after years of misdiagnosis and ineffective treatments, having spent hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Evans, a former rugby player from Houston, exemplifies this struggle. Vaccinated in March 2021, he rapidly developed symptoms: skyrocketing spike antibodies (over 18,000), low B cells, liver dysfunction, endocrine chaos, autoimmune encephalitis, and malignant pericarditis visible on X-rays as a large inflamed sac around the heart. Conventional tests (cardiac MRI, stress tests) appeared normal, and doctors dismissed vaccine causation, sometimes bordering on malpractice. Thyroid removal worsened his condition. He endured ER visits with heart rates spiking to 190 bpm, fainting, blood in multiple sites, and profound brain fog that stripped him of emotion and clarity. “I was dying,” Evans recalls. “I couldn’t get out of bed.”

The Japan protocol involves jugular-vein dual filtration apheresis using specialized canisters to remove autoantibodies, amyloids, and misfolded proteins directly from cerebral outflow, combined with stem cell growth factors (SGF) derived from dental pulp to promote regeneration and inhibit further clotting. Unlike peripheral vein methods, this targets neurovascular injury.

Evans underwent four weeks of treatment. After the first filtration, his cognitive clarity returned. Post-second session, the pressure in his heart and panic lifted. X-rays three weeks later showed near-complete resolution of pericarditis. Spike antibodies dropped 25%, and he regained 85% function—able to laugh, parent, and live normally, though managing residual Hashimoto’s. “I have my life back,” he says.

Chest X-Rays of Ken Evans before and after treatment:

Many others report rapid relief from brain fog and fatigue, with spectacular turnarounds even in severe cases. Nurse Lindsay, previously housebound for years, is now able to run. Recovery is slower with extensive brain damage but generally positive.

Challenges remain. Treatment costs are high, unavailable in the U.S. due to regulatory hurdles, and patients often exhaust resources first. McCairn notes emerging hydrogel-like plasma changes in samples, raising concerns about broader contamination risks. He stresses autoantibodies and molecular mimicry drive much pathology beyond persistent spike. While not a universal cure, the intervention achieves clinical significance for many.

Evans’ story underscores medical gaslighting yet offers hope. As advocates push for U.S. access and recognition, this protocol demonstrates that targeted removal of pathological proteins paired with regenerative support can reverse what seemed irreversible damage. For countless injured individuals, it represents not just treatment, but restored humanity.

If you are interested in having your blood tested for amyloid, go to Synpatek Labs for further instructions.

It’s Spring Break in Texas—a routine pause, more a collective exhale than a true celebration. After months of early alarms, rushed mornings, school runs, sports juggles, and endless demands, most families arrive at this week on the brink of exhaustion. I welcome the break from the school-year grind, yet it’s forever shadowed by March 2020. That Spring Break became our generation’s Pearl Harbor: the moment the world tilted irreversibly.

Spring Break 2020 wasn’t a random accident. History is littered with biological and chemical tools wielded by tyrants—Stalin’s NKVD “Laboratory 12” perfected undetectable poisons for state enemies; ancient and modern China has long explored biological agents in conflict. The 2020 pandemic marked the first successful large-scale deployment on a global scale. The United States, through funding gain-of-function research at home and abroad, became an unwitting—or worse, complicit—partner. Then came the worldwide push to inject a supposed countermeasure into billions.

I call it World War III: bloodless and brilliant in its subtlety. No battlefields, just engineered division that fractured families, friendships, and faith in institutions. Unlike traditional wars, it ended without victory parades or treaties—quietly, as if it never happened. Most prefer to move on; denial is easier than reckoning. But trauma of this scale leaves wounds that don’t heal without acknowledgment.

In high school history class, past wars felt distant, almost fictional. Present life seemed too civilized for such horrors to return; humanity had progressed beyond them. A bright future lay ahead. That innocence shattered six years ago this week, on March 11, when the WHO declared COVID-19 a pandemic. I’m writing this from the six-year anniversary, fresh from a few days with friends in Cancun. My public stance during the pandemic follows me everywhere—recognition dawns slowly, then conversation ignites. We all have stories.

This trip brought an unexpected encounter: running into one of my oldest friends from home at the breakfast buffet. We hadn’t spoken in five years, ever since my views on the COVID shot drove a wedge between us. This chance encounter had added weight—the night before, I’d celebrated publicly on X when another childhood friend finally admitted I’d been right. But with this friend, there was no apology, no reference to the rift or my very visible journey. We chatted about kids and life, carefully avoiding the wound. Outward hostility had faded, but without acknowledgment or apology, the deep resentment I feel toward her will never fully heal.

I call it World War III: bloodless and brilliant in its subtlety. No battlefields, just engineered division that fractured families, friendships, and faith in institutions. Unlike traditional wars, it ended without victory parades or treaties—quietly, as if it never happened.

This is how so many of us live now: surface-level interactions that skirt the deep fractures. Trust has eroded—at the government level, in medicine, even among friends. I will never trust our institutions the same way again, and I won’t ever take another “vaccine.” In my practice, the most frequent patient question is “Who can I trust?” I keep a referral list of like-minded physicians, but I still can’t point to a single hospital I’d recommend without reservation.

The adage “Those who do not study history are condemned to repeat it” is overly simplistic. If studying history alone prevented repetition, we could truly stop it. But we don’t learn because while themes repeat, the details never do. The pandemic was our generation’s greatest public health crisis, touching every life on earth. Fear would normally drive us to circle the wagons, yet—assuming origins in a deliberate act from a communist regime rather than nature—it became a masterclass in division from within. No bullets, no bloodshed, yet public confidence in our own government lies in ruins.

Fear is a powerful motivator; how we respond to it reveals character. The fear has faded, but in its place are festering wounds that refuse to heal. COVID exposed government vulnerabilities, leadership cowardice, and corruption in modern medicine—while also challenging the very foundations of the Constitution through unprecedented overreach on freedoms of speech, assembly, religion, and due process. It was the ultimate litmus test.

I never set out to become one of the most visible physician voices of the pandemic era. A solo ENT in Houston who launched my practice six months before COVID hit, I built a “third party free” model—no insurance contracts, no hospital affiliations, no government ties. That independence became my shield when the system turned.

What followed is a cautionary tale every American physician should know: a hospital defying a court order allowing me to treat an ICU patient, privileges revoked over social media posts speaking out against mandates, and an ongoing battle with the Texas Medical Board now in state district court—where the Texas attorney general has refused to defend the board.

The price of independence has been steep—lawsuits, revoked privileges, relentless board battles—but physician independence is the last real bulwark against institutional tyranny. It empowered me to speak truth, honor my oath to patients, and resist when compliance was the easier path. I keep fighting to set precedents that protect free speech and conscience for doctors everywhere, making it safer and simpler for others to follow. If we don’t defend this now, the next crisis will find even fewer voices willing to stand apart.

Fear is a powerful motivator; how we respond to it reveals character. The fear has faded, but in its place are festering wounds that refuse to heal. COVID exposed government vulnerabilities, leadership cowardice, and corruption in modern medicine

To help rebuild trust and support those seeking alternatives, several key organizations offer valuable resources. As a Senior Fellow with the Independent Medical Alliance (IMA), I contribute to their growing directory of independent physicians who prioritize patient-centered care free from institutional mandates—visit imahealth.org for their list and protocols. Americans for Health Freedom, which I founded, maintains an active tracker of state and federal politicians advocating to pull COVID shots from the market and restore medical freedom—see americansforhealthfreedom.org to learn more and take action. React19 provides critical aid through grants for the vaccine-injured, along with a comprehensive database of over 4,500 peer-reviewed studies documenting vaccine adverse events—explore react19.org for support and research. Finally, as a board member of the Vaccine Safety Research Foundation, I help advance their petition to end the vaccine liability carveout (the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act protections that shield manufacturers), pushing for accountability—find details and sign on at their site. These groups represent a network of like-minded voices working to empower patients, physicians, and policymakers in the wake of what we’ve endured.

The pandemic left permanent scars—personal divisions, shattered trust, and a medical system exposed as fragile and corrupt. Healing these collective wounds requires more than time or denial; it demands facing the truth head-on and refusing to pretend it never happened. Yet amid the damage, something powerful emerged: a renewed appreciation for independence and unfiltered truth. By remembering what occurred, continuing to question authority, and actively supporting those who stand apart from the system—whether in medicine or beyond—we build the resilience to prevent the next undeclared war from blindsiding us. The scars endure, but so does our resolve.

Hysteroscopy is the gold standard for evaluating abnormal uterine bleeding and diagnosing endometrial cancer, which has become the fastest-growing cancer in women by death rate between 2018 and 2022. Driven by the obesity epidemic and disproportionately affecting minorities, especially African Americans with fibroids, this disease demands vigilant screening. Dr. Kumar’s office-based approach - often requiring only NSAIDs or no anesthesia - offered patients convenience, lower costs ($1,000–$2,000 versus hospitals’ $14,000–$22,000), and reduced risks compared to sedation or general anesthesia. His clinic maintained an extensive collection of rigid and flexible hysteroscopes and operated with an open-door policy, seeing high volumes of Medicaid patients, including one in four in their dataset. Many procedures went unpaid, reflecting charity-like service rarely sustained in private practice.

In 2025, federal agents arrested Dr. Kumar in handcuffs outside the operating room on shocking charges: rape, sexual assault, human trafficking, and violations of the Travel Act. The government’s theory equated “medically unnecessary” hysteroscopies - determined retrospectively by non-specialist chart reviewers - with fraudulent penetration of female genitalia. Even procedures performed by female physician assistants while Dr. Kumar operated elsewhere triggered personal liability. Initial salacious allegations dominated media coverage for months, devastating his reputation as a “predator in a white coat.” These were later dropped, leaving medical necessity and overutilization claims. A mixed verdict followed a December trial, leaving Dr. Kumar in legal limbo, facing potential prison time despite clearance by the state medical board.

The case exposes profound flaws. Reviewers lacking gynecologic oncology expertise critiqued documentation minutiae while ignoring context like patient volume (nine times peers) and low reimbursement (averaging $320 per Medicare case, under 10% of practice revenue). Data presented skewed comparisons by excluding hospital payments. One reviewer dismissed procedures on patients with rare anatomical anomalies or claimed negative hysteroscopies rule out cancer for six to twelve months - an assertion contradicted by Dr. Kumar’s own cases of rapid progression. Insurance companies had previously praised his work and ended audits favorably.

Dr. Kumar’s ordeal, costing millions in legal fees, has forced clinic closure amid death threats, echoing dangers faced by other physicians. It warns doctors against accepting Medicaid or high-risk patients, potentially worsening access in underserved areas. As endometrial cancer rises, prosecuting vigilant screening as fraud inverts priorities: protecting patients should not endanger healers. Greater transparency, specialist input in reviews, and safeguards against over-criminalization are urgently needed. Dr. Kumar’s fight underscores a vital truth - when government becomes both payer and prosecutor without checks, medicine itself is at risk.

Watch my interview with Dr. Kumar here.

…

COVID was a highly predictable disease, easy to diagnose without a test, and because it was virtually the only illness I treated for two years, I quickly mastered it. The disease started like any other viral illness, and most recovered with minimal or no treatment, but in the small percentage who struggled, Day Eight was a turning point. By the eighth day of symptoms, patients either began the road to recovery or started to spiral down the drain.

With COVID’s predictable time course, I learned the importance of early interventions to thwart possible death. In my hands, proper treatment before Day Eight guaranteed survival. After Day Eight, a subset of patients, typically those with multiple comorbid conditions who did not receive early treatment, markedly worsened as a tidal wave of inflammation gripped their bodies.

I gained extensive experience preventing patients from getting to this point and a more limited, but highly rewarding, experience saving patients who came to me late and under other circumstances would have likely died in the hospital.

I successfully treated over six thousand COVID patients; I’ve never treated this many patients with one disease in my career and likely never will again. Nonetheless, the impact I made was minimal in the grand scheme of a worldwide pandemic. Were it not for social media, I would have likely been left alone. But when I made the mistake of sharing my findings publicly, international media branded me as “dangerous,” and my life changed in ways I’d never imagined.

Prior to the pandemic, medicine as a profession enjoyed a sterling reputation. Hospitals were regarded as safe havens where well-meaning physicians and nurses used every power at their disposal to save lives. Doctors welcomed sick patients, and pharmacists filled their prescriptions, barring any legitimate safety concerns. The seeds of corruption were present but well hidden. It took the largest public health event of our time for them to sprout.

Fear drives people to embrace the arms of authority, and during the pandemic, the arms of authority returned the embrace and squeezed hard. COVID killed a lot of people unnecessarily, and in the process, uncovered massive failures in our public health system. Like the “emperor with no clothes,” our government leaders commanded, “Trust the experts,” while delivering a chaotic and flawed response shrouded in a guise of certainty. Doctors and nurses were neutered, as bureaucrats meant to control purse strings morphed into bureaucrats controlling patient care.

The pandemic should have been a wake-up call, but even with a new administration at the helm, few are willing to talk about the one issue that directly impacted every single American. I write this memoir as one of the few physicians who stood up to and tried to take down Goliath. It turns out the forces I faced are larger and stronger than Goliath, but the journey has been meaningful.

Haviland, fired in 2021 from his $165,000 defense contracting role at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base for refusing the experimental mRNA shot, turned his analytical skills toward this mystery. Inspired by the 2022 documentary Died Suddenly, he contacted the Ohio Embalmers Association. Vice President Woody Wilson confirmed seeing the clots, corroborating accounts from embalmers who first noticed them roughly six months after vaccine deployment. Haviland and collaborator Laura Kasner launched global surveys of embalmers from 2022 to 2025. Results consistently showed 66-83% of respondents observing these clots in 20-30% of cases, with sharp increases in the 36-50 age group—aligning with excess mortality and disability data from analysts like Edward Dowd.

Scientific teams, including Australian organic chemist Greg Harrison, have analyzed the clots using advanced techniques. Normal clotting involves fibrinogen converting to fibrin in balanced alpha, beta, and gamma chains, forming smooth, plasmin-degradable structures. These abnormal clots show a distorted 9:4:1 ratio, with high phosphorus, sulfur, and sometimes tin, low iron, magnesium, and potassium. Researchers hypothesize that spike protein—whether from infection or vaccine—and phospholipid nanoparticles phosphorylate and hijack fibrinogen, creating misfolded, amyloid-like polymers resistant to breakdown. Thioflavin T staining lights them up green under UV, confirming amyloid properties. Scanning electron microscopy reveals twisted, nodular fibers unlike normal “spaghetti-like” fibrin.

Alarmingly, these clots appear not only in corpses but in living patients. Endovascular specialist Dr. Mahana Basheeret reported extracting them via catheter from legs, hearts, and other vessels in his Jacksonville cath lab. Similar reports from a UK whistleblower describe 3-10 such clots weekly, almost exclusively in vaccinated individuals, with severity increasing by dose count. Standard clot-busters like tPA fail; physical removal is required. Radiologists struggle to detect them as they mold to vessel walls. Microclots resembling “coffee grounds” also clog capillaries, impairing oxygen exchange.Official response has been minimal. Haviland shared survey data with FDA, CDC, and NIH annually since 2023, including before an advisory meeting, yet received no substantive action. Some doctors faced pressure to cease communication. Funeral associations largely remain silent, despite member concerns. Patient surveys (over 1,400 responses) mirror CDC V-safe data, showing post-2021 surges in leg, lung, brain, and heart clots.

This vascular amyloidosis represents a visible, testable signal amid broader debates on vaccine side effects. While spike from infection may contribute in rare cases, persistence of mRNA-driven production offers a plausible driver for ongoing cases years later. Protocols like nattokinase, bromelain, and curcumin aim to address spike, with advanced filtration showing promise. As embalmers continue annual conventions and data collection, independent science must prioritize rigorous autopsy, imaging, and blood supply studies. Transparency and further investigation are essential to understand and mitigate this persistent issue.

The FDA’s 2022 decision to remove several peptides from the compounding safety list disrupted access for patients and clinicians. This shift pushed many toward gray-market sources, often labeled “research only,” raising serious safety concerns regarding purity, potency, and sourcing. Recent enforcement actions have shut down non-compliant suppliers shipping across state lines. DeNeui emphasizes that reputable compounding pharmacies adhering to FDA-inspected facilities and good manufacturing practices remain viable in certain states, but patients should avoid unverified online vendors. Underground products lack proper testing and clinician oversight, posing risks of contamination or inconsistent dosing.

Growth hormone-stimulating peptides like CJC-1295 and ipamorelin attract teenagers via social media for muscle building and performance. DeNeui strongly cautions against this. Healthy adolescents with normal growth and puberty do not need them; exogenous interference can disrupt natural hormone balance, potentially stunting growth, elevating prolactin (causing gynecomastia), or causing pituitary issues. These compounds are better suited for age-related sarcopenia, injury recovery (e.g., Lisfranc fractures under medical supervision), or immune support in adults via peptides like Thymosin Alpha-1 and BPC-157. Proper cycling and clinician guidance are essential, as peptides act briefly and require tailored protocols.

GLP-1 medications demonstrate strong efficacy for obesity and type 2 diabetes but demand careful management. Compounded versions are more affordable and allow micro-dosing to minimize side effects, though muscle loss remains a concern—up to 40% of weight lost can be lean mass without adequate protein and monitoring. Adverse events, including rare severe cases like pancreatitis, underscore the need for baseline assessments and experienced providers. DeNeui favors starting with semaglutide or tirzepatide from trusted sources.

Hormone replacement, particularly subcutaneous bioidentical pellets (estrogen and testosterone), offers sustained release for three to six months. Unlike synthetic options such as Premarin (derived from mare urine), bioidentical or biosimilar hormones more closely mimic the body’s molecules. Pellet hormone therapy, used since the 1930s, supports mood, libido, energy, muscle maintenance, and overall quality of life, especially as testosterone declines in women post-childbearing. Progesterone is typically taken orally and necessary when taking estrogen to protect the uterus. Individual dosing accounts for age, activity, and hormone levels; side effects like unwanted hair growth are manageable. Urine metabolite testing (e.g., DUTCH) and GI mapping provide deeper insights into hormone processing and gut health, which influences conditions like PCOS, endometriosis, and fibroids.

Both peptides and hormones offer powerful tools when used responsibly under trained clinicians. They are not shortcuts for lifestyle deficits but complements to nutrition, sleep, exercise, and stress management. As regulation evolves and research advances, prioritizing safety, evidence, and personalized care will maximize benefits while minimizing risks. Professional guidance remains non-negotiable for these potent therapies.

Follow Terri DeNeui on X and learn more with her book “Hormone Havoc.”

Concerns stem from early observations by European naturopaths and doctors who examined blood under magnification and noted anomalies in vaccinated individuals, sometimes resembling patterns seen in late-stage cancer patients, even among those without symptoms. These findings coincided with a reported 522% increase in blood-related illness claims in the UK from 2021 to 2022. While mainstream health authorities maintain that mRNA shots do not transmit via blood and that vaccinated donors pose no added risk, questions persist about lingering spike protein, potential DNA fragments, and biodistribution effects documented in some studies.

A high-profile case involved a Texas patient at Baylor St. Luke’s whose wife—a universal donor—and friends were denied the opportunity to donate directed blood for his surgery. The hospital also resisted autologous donation despite sufficient lead time. Such denials highlight tensions between patient autonomy and institutional policies. The FDA issued guidance on October 23, 2023, cautioning that directed donations based on characteristics like vaccination status lack scientific support and may carry higher infectious disease risks than the general supply. Critics argue this relies on a 2013 Dorsey et al. study from an earlier era dominated by AIDS-related fears. That study initially showed higher infection markers in directed donations (often from first-time donors), but after adjusting for repeat versus new donors, the risk difference largely disappeared or even favored directed donations in some metrics. Opponents claim the FDA’s interpretation misrepresents the data to discourage patient choice, echoing past controversies over information suppression during the pandemic.

The U.S. blood industry generates substantial revenue—estimated in the tens of billions annually—and the country exports a significant portion of plasma-derived products, accounting for roughly 2.65% of total exports and supplying about 70% of global needs in some categories. Blood banks often separate whole blood into components (packed red cells, platelets, plasma) for efficiency and reformulate as needed, a process that may generate more revenue than simple directed whole-blood transfers. Large organizations like the American Red Cross and others have opposed legislation protecting directed and autologous donations, citing supply chain concerns and invoking the FDA statement. Hospitals contract exclusively with one blood bank, creating bottlenecks when policies conflict.

In response, over a dozen states have introduced bills to safeguard patient rights to autologous or directed donations and, in some cases, require labeling or separation of blood by donor vaccination status. Idaho advanced such legislation with near-unanimous support after testimony revealed local barriers, including denials even for autologous blood. Similar efforts in Texas nearly passed but faced procedural hurdles, while bills in Tennessee, Kentucky, and elsewhere continue. Proponents emphasize that one’s own blood or that from known healthy donors was historically the safest option and should not suddenly become restricted. They also highlight alternatives like Cell Saver technology, which recycles a patient’s own blood during surgery (common in open-heart procedures), though hospitals rarely offer it proactively.

Demand for Safe Blood’s matching services is rising, driven by resistance from hospitals and blood banks. The organization does not collect or store blood itself to avoid heavy regulation; instead, it connects compatible donors and recipients for timely, fresh transfers coordinated through physicians and hospital blood banks. Membership is open on a sliding scale, with donor volunteers (unvaccinated individuals willing to help) providing critical support at no cost.

Ultimately, this debate transcends blood logistics. It concerns medical freedom, transparency, and the right to informed consent in an era of novel biotechnologies whose full effects remain under study. While regulatory bodies assert the blood supply’s safety based on standard infectious disease screening (HIV, hepatitis, etc.), growing patient advocacy seeks empirical verification and choice—especially in non-emergencies. As states deliberate legislation, the core principle endures: the safest blood is often one’s own or from trusted sources, and policies should prioritize patient well-being over institutional convenience or industry flow. Safe Blood and similar initiatives represent a grassroots effort to restore that autonomy, ensuring future generations inherit a blood supply that respects individual risk assessments.

I once had privileges at Houston Methodist and was proud to have them. Methodist has prestige and joining their team is not easy. If Methodist were a country club, it’d be the most exclusive country club in town.

Pride turned to horror on November 12, 2021 when I received a text message at 4:30 in the afternoon (on a Friday of course) from reporter Julia Gill at the Houston Chronicle asking me to verify whether it was true Houston Methodist had suspended my privileges.

As the shock from that text was settling in, I received notice from a friend that Methodist was tweeting about me.

Having the most prestigious hospital in town announce to the world that you are “dangerous” is potentially career-ending and certainly unprecedented. To my knowledge, a hospital has never tried to publicly ruin a doctor in this manner.

Their PR campaign worked, and within hours, I had CNN, NBC, CBS, and the Washington Post asking me for comments. I was a deer in headlights and spent the weekend in the fetal position. Thankfully I had the sense to hire a lawyer and a PR consultant, and on Monday, I resigned from the hospital, held a press conference, and announced my intention to sue them.

Robert Malone referred me to attorney Steve Biss, who had successfully represented Devin Nunes in defamation cases. Biss was cantankerous and difficult to deal with, but the other lawyers I spoke to would not take my case. We lost, appealed and lost on appeal, but tragically, we did not lose on the merits of the case. Biss failed to include my date of birth and address on my affidavit. The court struck it, and without an affidavit, I had no argument. Biss failed to respond to motions to strike my affidavit, and following judgment against me when final legal fees were being discussed, he also did not respond. The court ordered me to pay Methodist $166,541 to cover their legal costs.

Shortly after losing the appeal, Biss had a massive stroke, and I haven’t heard from him or seen him since. I did manage to track him down in a nursing home, but he was non-communicative. He had no partners and no malpractice insurance. His ex-wife detests him and was not willing to help the slew of clients left hanging in the wind. It was truly the worst possible outcome I could have imagined.

I found a new lawyer, Dennis Postiglione, who graciously picked up the case to help me negotiate the terms of the settlement. Dennis tried for months to contact Methodist’s legal team. After no response, he eventually discovered the attorney on record was no longer employed by the firm handling the case (Yetter Coleman.)

Dennis asked the new attorney on the case, Doug Griffith, to waive the accruing interest since the delay in payment was due to matters out of my control. We also asked if the money could be donated to charity and entertained the possibility of reduced payment in exchange for a non-disparagement and confidentiality agreement. Doug agreed to waive the interest but declined both the non-disparagement agreement and the disbursement of funds to charity. Methodist seems to be a non-profit in name only.

On Friday, January 24, 2025, I signed the settlement agreement. I was eager to pay and move on and asked for wire instructions. I also had to have the money to them by February 1st. They ghosted us, so on January 29th, I mailed them a check which they received on January 31st. I assumed the matter was settled, and since they rejected a non-disparagement agreement, I had no qualms posting this:

These posts prompted them to change their mind on the settlement agreement, even though I had already signed and mailed the check. From my lawyer: “Opposing counsel sent an email saying that some Tweet or social media post you made about a Methodist employee was a basis for pulling the settlement and that they would pursue post-judgment financial discovery against you. Essentially, they will send you discovery requests seeking all of your financial information.”

As we prepared to take this to court, on February 13th, they cashed my check.

In response, we filed a motion to enforce the Settlement Agreement and asked for sanctions against opposing counsel. From our brief:

In short, the parties negotiated a settlement. A unilateral offer was made by Methodist. That offer was accepted by Plaintiff’s performance. Plaintiff accepted the terms exactly as presented by Methodist, executed the Agreement, and mailed payment five days earlier than the Agreement’s deadline. Defendants’ attempt to slither out of the deal and mischaracterize it now as a partial payment is in bad faith and constitutes sanctionable conduct. Plaintiff now seeks to enforce the Settlement Agreement and recover her fees and costs for doing so. A deal is a deal.

The hearing to settle this matter was rescheduled four times but finally took place last Wednesday. Attorneys Tracy LeRoy and Doug Griffith represented Methodist - Tracy handled the arguments and consistent with past behavior, made multiple misstatements. The first hearing we had on this issue - the initial one where were defending their motion to dismiss - she claimed my statements on social media were akin to telling the public to swallow bleach. This go-around, she complained I was posting too much about Houston Methodist on X, falsely exaggerating that I post on average twenty-five times a month about them. Somehow Tracy fails to appreciate that Houston Methodist launched me into the public eye, and were it not for their actions, I would have zero influence on social media.

Judge Erica Hughes stated that Methodist should have put the money into a trust since we did not have a settlement agreement, but nonetheless ordered me to pay them an additional $26,000+ in interest. We plan on appealing.

The one bright moment of the day occurred on the way out of the courtroom, where I was able to hand attorney Doug Griffith an advanced copy of my book “Dangerous Misinformation: The Virus, the Treatment, and the Lies.” I told him he was in it, so his ego will compel him to read it.

My friend Tom Slocum was also able to pester Tracy and Doug with questions they didn’t want to answer (see video at the beginning of this article.)

The ultimate takeaway from my fight with Houston Methodist is that the hospital cares very deeply about covering up their crimes. Despite their enormous wealth and influence, they are exquisitely sensitive to criticism. The biggest weapon I have against them is spreading the truth, and if you would like to help me in that endeavor, please consider purchasing my book. If you don’t want to read it, then send a copy to Methodist (CEO Marc Boom 6565 Fannin St., Houston, TX 77030.)

“Dangerous Misinformation: The Virus, the Treatments, and the Lies” is my no-holds-barred tell-all memoir. It serves as both a tribute to those who stood with me and a reckoning for the people and institutions that tried to destroy me over the past six years.

If you’re worried you might be in the book, you probably are. If you helped me fight back, I made sure to include you. And if you played a role but didn’t make it into this book, don’t worry—you’ll likely appear in the sequel. Since I turned in the manuscript a year ago, the fight has continued, and many more people have entered my sphere. While this book is the story of my survival, the next one will be the story of our victory.

After a quick skim, I realized how large that list of people I mentioned in the book is and asked Claude AI to assist. Here’s the list. It’s probably not complete, but it’s close.

The Author & Family

• Mary Talley Bowden (author)

• Army Perry (brother-in-law)

Physicians & Medical Professionals

• Dr. Kyle McCutcheon (ENT employer)

• Dr. Alasdair Gilchrist (colleague ENT)

• Dr. Richard Goode (mentor at Stanford)

• Dr. Fee (Dr. W.F. Fee, Stanford otolaryngology)

• Dr. Mas Takashima (Houston Methodist ENT chair)

• Dr. Omar Ahmed (Houston Methodist ENT)

• Dr. Robert Malone (mRNA technology inventor)

• Dr. Pierre Kory (FLCCC co-founder)

• Dr. Paul Marik (FLCCC co-founder)

• Dr. Joseph Varon (UMMC critical care and FLCCC founder)

• Dr. Zev Zelenko (hydroxychloroquine protocol)

• Dr. Richard Bartlett (budesonide advocate)

• Dr. Thomas Borody (ivermectin researcher, Australia)

• Dr. Stella Immanuel (America’s Frontline Doctors)

• Dr. Peter McCullough (Texas physician)

• Dr. Richard Urso (Texas physician)

• Dr. Simone Gold (America’s Frontline Doctors)

• Dr. Peter Hotez (Baylor vaccine researcher)

• Dr. Eric Hensen (Palestine, TX ENT)

• Dr. Anna Pou (Hurricane Katrina case)

• Dr. Robert Apter (FDA lawsuit co-plaintiff)

• Dr. John Littell (COVID conference speaker)

• Dr. Mollie James (St. Louis surgeon)

• Dr. Kat Lindley (physician ally)

• Dr. Lynn Fynn (physician ally)

• Dr. Brian Tyson (physician)

• Dr. George Fareed (physician)

• Dr. Craig Wax (physician)

• Dr. Ben Marble (physician)

• Dr. Simon Goddek (physician)

• Dr. Jen Gunter / “The Vajenda” (obstetrician, critic)

• Mama Doctor Jones (obstetrician YouTuber)

• Dr. Nelly Arielle Heiman (Houston Methodist OB)

• Dr. Stuart Solomon (Houston Methodist Medical Staff President)

• Dr. Ronny Ford (Texas Huguley chief medical officer)

• Dr. Cristin Dickerson (Green Imaging radiologist)

• Dr. Juliet Breeze (FMMA coleader)

• Dr. Oscar Tamez (ENT)

• Dr. Robert McLean (ENT)

• Dr. Devinder Bhatia (Houston cardiothoracic surgeon)

• Dr. Satish Nayak (TMB member)

• Dr. Sherif Zaafran (TMB president)

• Dr. Irvin Zeitler (former TMB president, expert witness)

• Dr. Alex Gilman (TMB expert witness)

• Dr. Robert Bredt (TMB medical director)

• Dr. Gavin Shokar (Wisconsin hospital)

• Dr. David O’Rourke (UPenn neurosurgery professor)

• Dr. Molly Rutherford (physician)

• Dr. Renata Moon (physician)

• Dr. Kelly Victory (physician)

• Dr. Sam Sigoloff (physician)

• Dr. Michael Turner (physician)

• Dr. Scott Jensen (physician)

• Dr. James Thorp (physician)

• Dr. Kirk Milhoan (physician)

• Dr. Meryl Nass (physician)

• Dr. Theresa Long (physician)

• Dr. Charles Hoffe (physician)

• Dr. Sherri Tenpenny (physician)

• Dr. Ryan Cole (physician)

• Dr. Scott Miller (physician)

• Dr. Ron Creque (physician)

• Dr. Steve LaTulippe (physician)

• Dr. Angie Farella (physician)

• Dr. Richard Edgerly (physician)

• Dr. Kirk Moore (Utah plastic surgeon)

• Dr. Eithan Haim (Baylor whistleblower)

• Dr. Joseph Ladapo (Florida Surgeon General)

• Dr. Marty Makary (FDA/HHS)

• Dr. Vinay Prasad (physician/author)

• Dr. Jimmy Widmer (TEXPAC head)

• Dr. Valerie Smith (TMA pediatrician)

• Dr. Ori Hampel (Houston urologist)

• Dr. Linda Villarreal (TMA president)

• Dr. Charleta Guillory (Texas Pediatric Society president)

• Dr. M. Brett Cooper (UT Southwestern)

• Dr. Shanna Combs (TMA activist)

• Dr. Emily Briggs (TMA activist)

• Dr. Maria Monge (adolescent medicine)

• Dr. Sealy Massingill (Planned Parenthood CMO)

• Dr. John Carlo (TMA LGBTQ section)

• Dr. D. Michael Ready (TMA delegate)

• Dr. May Lau (UT Southwestern)

• Dr. Hector Granados (El Paso physician)

• Dr. Jason Terk (TMA pediatrician)

• Dr. Christina Propst (Houston pediatrician)

• Dr. Joseph Valenti (TMA/TMLT board chair)

• Dr. John Hellerstedt (Texas DSHS Commissioner)

• Dr. Jennifer Shuford (current Texas DSHS Commissioner)

• Dr. Marc Boom (Houston Methodist CEO)

• Dr. Richard Ogden Roberts (Texas Children’s Hospital)

• Dr. David Paul (Texas Children’s Hospital)

• Dr. Anthony Fauci (NIAID/government)

• Dr. Rochelle Walensky (CDC director)

• Deborah Conrad (physician’s assistant, whistleblower)

• Casey Means (ENT/biotech, surgeon general nominee)

Nurses

• Jennifer Bridges (nurse, fired by Houston Methodist)

• Kimberly Peeples (nurse, fired by Sunset Clinic)

• Kimberley Witzel (Ft. Worth nurse, Jones case)

• Alison Barkholtz (Wisconsin nurse, Schara case)

• Hollee McInnis (Wisconsin nurse, Schara case)

Patients

• Mr. Rodriguez (veteran COVID patient)

• Jason Jones (hospital prisoner patient)

• Erin Jones (Jason’s wife)

• John Nelson Russell (18-year-old, Memorial Hermann)

• Grace Schara (19-year-old, Down syndrome, Wisconsin)

• Scott Schara (Grace’s father)

• Jessica (Grace’s sister)

• Jacob Jones (Jason Jones’s son)

Lawyers & Legal Figures

• Ralph Lorigo (attorney, hospital cases)

• Beth Parlato (attorney, Jones case)

• Jerri Lynn Ward (local attorney)

• Steve Mitby (Houston trial lawyer)

• Michael Barnhart (attorney)

• Amy Swanholm (TMB Board attorney)

• Jared Kelson / Boyden Gray (FDA lawsuit attorney)

• Robert Barnes (attorney)

• Ilya Feoktistov (attorney)

• Steven Biss (defamation attorney)

• Dennis Postiglione (defamation attorney, Austin)

• Warner Mendenhall (Freedom Counsel, Schara case)

• Brook Jackson (Pfizer whistleblower)

• Rachel Rodriguez (Vires Law Group)

• Judge Lauren Reeder (Harris County)

• Judge Mike Engelhart (Harris County)

• Judge Christine Nowak (493rd District Court)

• Justices Randy Wilson, Kevin Jewell, Charles Spain (Texas 14th Court of Appeals)

• Judges Frances Bourliot, Jerry Zimmerer (Texas 14th Court of Appeals)

• Judges Rachelle Robles, Linda Burgess (SOAH)

• Joshua Ross (Texas Huguley attorney)

Politicians & Government Officials

• Greg Abbott (Texas Governor)

• Ron DeSantis (Florida Governor)

• Xavier Becerra (HHS Secretary)

• Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (HHS Secretary/former presidential candidate)

• Nicole Shanahan (RFK Jr.’s running mate)

• Vivek Murthy (US Surgeon General)

• Jerome Adams (US Surgeon General)

• Jen Psaki (White House Press Secretary)

• Andrew Slavitt (White House COVID advisor)

• Jim Jordan (Rep., R-Ohio)

• Amy Klobuchar (Senator, Minnesota)

• Jack Dorsey (Twitter CEO)

• Mark Zuckerberg (Facebook CEO)

• Rachel Levine (Admiral, HHS)

• Pam Bondi (US Attorney General)

• Ken Paxton (Texas AG)

• Alan Wilson (South Carolina AG)

• Mike Johnson (Speaker of the House)

• Rep. Brian Harrison (Texas)

• Sen. Bob Hall (Texas Senate District 2)

• Rep. Steve Toth (Texas)

• Sen. Mayes Middleton (Texas)

• Rep. Tony Tinderholt (Texas)

• Rep. Jeff Leach (Texas)

• Speaker Dade Phelan (Texas)

• Rep. Ann Johnson (Texas)

• Rep. Brad Paquette (Michigan State Rep.)

• Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY)

• Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA)

• Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI)

• Rep. Julie Johnson (Texas Democrat)

• Rep. Jasmine Crockett (Texas Democrat)

• Rep. Joanne Shofner (Texas)

• Rep. Wesley Virdell (Texas)

• Rep. Helen Kerwin (Texas)

• Rep. Gary VanDeaver (Texas)

• Sen. Kevin Sparks (Texas)

• Sen. Van Taylor (Plano)

• Gov. Asa Hutchinson (Arkansas)

• Larry Ellison (tech billionaire, Trump White House)

• Donald Trump (President)

Media & Public Figures

• Michael Berry (Houston radio host)

• Wayne Dolcefino (investigative reporter)

• Julian Gill (Houston Chronicle reporter)

• Emily Miller (Washington DC reporter)

• Bill Barajas (KPRC 2 reporter)

• Jessica Willey (ABC13 reporter)

• Keith Allen (CNN)

• Daniel Horowitz (The Blaze podcast)

• Joe Rogan (podcaster)

• Tucker Carlson (media personality)

• Jesse Kelly (political commentator)

• Jimmy Dore (comedian/commentator)

• Nick Sawyer (No License for Disinformation)

• Savannah Sparks / “RxOrcist” (social media influencer)

• Imran Ahmed (CCDH CEO)

• Todd Wolynn (Shots Heard Round the World)

• Chad Hermann (Shots Heard Round the World)

• Lindsay Penney / “TexasLindsay” (social media)

• Sharon Barnes (TMB nonphysician member)

• Jarrett Schneider (TMB media relations)

• Tandra Cobern (Texas Huguley administrator)

• Winnie Brown (Houston Methodist medical staff director)

• Karl Mundt (MicroGenDX rep)

• Arian Campo-Flores (Wall Street Journal)

Other Notable Names

• Calley Means (MAHA advisor, lobbyist)

• Grady Means (Calley & Casey’s father, former White House aide)

• Anne Wojcicki (former 23andMe CEO)

• Susie Wiles (Trump chief of staff)

• Brianne Dressen (React19 co-founder)

• Dr. Joel Wallskog (React19 co-founder)

• Greta Crawford (”Protocol Kills” website)

• Laura Bartlett (Protocol Kills co-creator)

• Thomas Jefferson (historical reference)

• Galileo (historical reference)

• Nelson Rockefeller (historical, Grady Means worked for him)

Pre-order now!

Yet today this same doctor faces up to 50 years in federal prison. The reason? He dared to speak out when the Biden administration pulled monoclonal antibodies in December 2021, a move he argued would cost lives. Appearing on Fox News and Newsmax, Dr. Elfenbein publicly warned that the effective treatment was being sacrificed to protect the emergency-use authorization of COVID vaccines. Federal law, he noted, bars EUAs for vaccines when alternatives exist. Four months later, without warning or subpoena, the Department of Justice indicted him on five counts of healthcare fraud for “upcoding”—billing a Level 4 evaluation-and-management code instead of Level 3, a difference averaging roughly $50 per claim. The total alleged overpayment across the five charts reviewed: $250.

The case was built on five patient charts out of more than 100,000. No professional coder was consulted before indictment; government lawyers simply declared the codes fraudulent. Two independent expert coders later reviewed hundreds of charts and found no fraud—one was the former president of the ethics committee of the American Association of Professional Coders, the other a DOJ trainer who hunts fraud for a living. Even the American Medical Association and the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons filed amicus briefs defending Dr. Elfenbein, noting that he followed the very coding rules the AMA itself wrote.

After a three-week trial, a jury convicted him. But Chief Judge of Maryland overturned the verdict in an unprecedented 93-page opinion, declaring there was literally “no evidence” of a crime and that the government’s case should never have been brought. The judge called it a “shoot first and ask questions later” prosecution. The Biden DOJ appealed on its final day in office, forcing a new trial scheduled for August 2026.

Dr. Elfenbein now asks the Trump administration’s weaponization task force—established by Attorney General Pam Bondi—to review his case as a protected whistleblower. Former U.S. Attorney Rod Rosenstein publicly called the prosecution baseless. Meanwhile, Dr. Elfenbein’s legal bills have reached millions; he drives a Hyundai and relies on his wife, a pediatric oncologist, to keep the family afloat.

This is not a story about $250 in disputed billing. It is a cautionary tale of government retaliation against a doctor who saved lives and told the truth. The case must be dropped—not as a favor, but as simple justice. Americans who risked everything to fight a pandemic should not spend the rest of their lives fighting their own government. Visit dropthecase.com to support Dr. Elfenbein and help ensure this injustice ends.

The patient responded to surgical incision, bone sawing, and organ manipulation with typical hemodynamic changes, requiring standard anesthesia. This experience haunted Dr. Klessig, prompting her to examine primary sources. She later authored The Brain Death Fallacy, arguing that brain death is not equivalent to biological death but a utilitarian redefinition enabling organ procurement.

Historical Context and the Harvard Redefinition

For millennia, death was recognized by the irreversible cessation of heartbeat, breathing, and the passage of time—signs observable without medical technology. Traditions like wakes ensured certainty. In 1968, shortly after Christiaan Barnard’s heart transplants, a Harvard ad hoc committee proposed “irreversible coma” as a new criterion for death. Their JAMA paper, lacking scientific references, described patients as “desperately injured” and a “burden,” justifying the change on utilitarian grounds: freeing ICU beds and resolving controversies over taking organs from comatose individuals.

The committee did not claim these patients were biologically dead; it redefined them as such by fiat. This bypassed the “dead donor rule”—a moral precept requiring donors to be dead before organ removal and not killed by the process. By declaring certain comatose patients dead, procurement could proceed legally while the body remained biologically alive, warm, and perfused.

Scientific and Philosophical Flaws

Dr. Klessig highlights that brain death is often a prognosis, not a diagnosis of death. A key 1970s neuropathology study of 26 brains declared brain dead under stricter criteria found 10 normal and fewer than half showing diffuse destruction. The authors concluded it predicted possible death, not confirmed it. Subsequent cases, including a boy (known as TK) who lived 20 years post-declaration with no brain tissue at autopsy (only scar tissue), demonstrate that biological life can persist.

Modern guidelines (e.g., 2023 American Academy of Neurology) rely on a clinical bedside exam: unresponsiveness, no motor response to pain, absent brainstem reflexes, and an apnea test. These are subjective. EEG is no longer required, despite 20% of diagnosed cases showing brain waves; over half retain hypothalamic function (regulating temperature, blood pressure, and awareness). Legal definitions demand irreversible cessation of all brain functions, creating inconsistencies that have prompted failed attempts to revise the Uniform Determination of Death Act.

Patients like Jenny Heyman, declared brain dead yet inwardly aware and able to recover with attentive care, underscore that unresponsiveness does not equal unconsciousness or death. Dr. Klessig notes the public receives no informed consent about these debates when checking “organ donor” at the DMV.

Financial and Systemic Pressures

Hospitals must report potential donors to organ procurement organizations (OPOs) under CMS rules for Medicare/Medicaid funding. Transplants generate massive revenue—one set of organs (heart, lungs, liver, kidneys, etc.) can yield over $8 million in billable charges, contributing to a $60+ billion industry.

Cases like TJ Hoover, who showed purposeful movement and survived after being prepared for harvest, illustrate pressure on staff, and practices like controlled donation after circulatory death (DCD) and normothermic regional perfusion (NRP) further blur lines. In DCD, life support is withdrawn from non-brain-dead patients with poor prognoses; a short “no-touch” period follows cardiac arrest before procurement. Reports, including Misty Hawkins (who gasped and had a beating heart upon incision), show risks of intervening on still-living individuals. NRP involves clamping brain circulation to declare brain death mid-procedure while resuscitating other organs—ethically controversial.

Internationally, issues are graver: China’s state-linked trafficking from prisoners of conscience and cartel activity in Mexico exploit vulnerable populations.

Ethical Imperative and Protections

Dr. Klessig distinguishes ethical living donation (e.g., kidney from a relative or stranger) from deceased donation reliant on contested definitions. She argues society has sacrificed progress in neurological care by writing off “hard cases” as donors rather than treating them.

To protect oneself: Avoid registering as an organ donor, as it is legally binding and OPOs have sued families. Use resources like respectforhumanlife.com for refusal documents, healthcare power of attorney, and wallet cards. Families should ask detailed questions and seek second opinions.

Dr. Klessig’s account, rooted in clinical experience and historical analysis, urges informed consent and reevaluation. Changing definitions does not alter biological reality. True respect for human life demands transparency, rigorous science, and ethical alternatives to practices that risk treating the living as dead.

Follow Dr. Klessig on X and on YouTube.

These resolutions capture the issues I’ve championed for the past several years. They include eliminating all vaccine mandates to restore individual health autonomy and the Second Opinion Act, which ensures hospitalized patients can consult independent doctors from outside the facility. We called for banning Remdesivir, given its controversial use and risks during the pandemic, and for a Texas mRNA Pharmaceutical Sovereignty and Safety Act to restrict mRNA-based products in both humans and animals. Other measures empower physicians by allowing office dispensing of prescriptions, lifting restrictions on doctor-owned hospitals, and addressing the physician shortage through quality-focused incentives rather than bringing in foreign-trained doctors. We demanded reforms to the Texas Medical Board’s complaint, rule-making, and disciplinary processes, which have often targeted dissenting doctors unfairly. Additional resolutions seek to raise caps on non-economic damages in medical malpractice cases, recognize certifications from the National Board of Physicians and Surgeons for advertising as board-certified, hold nonprofit hospitals accountable by requiring partial property tax payments, rescind the DOCTOR Act (HB 2038), restore patient medical privacy rights, repeal ACA mandates to revive affordable major medical indemnity insurance, and opposed REAL ID as a potential national surveillance and domestic passport system. We even support a new major theme park in Houston to boost our local economy and promote healthy, fun family life.

As Precinct Chair, I now serve as the foundational leader for our local Republican efforts in Precinct 440. My responsibilities include mobilizing voters, recruiting and training volunteers, organizing precinct conventions (like the one where these resolutions passed), building community engagement on key issues, and acting as a direct liaison between residents and higher levels of the party. Precinct chairs are the “boots on the ground”—we turn everyday concerns into platform priorities, influence candidate endorsements, and drive turnout during elections. In a massive county like Harris, this grassroots work is essential to shifting the direction of Texas politics.

With unanimous approval at the precinct level, these resolutions now advance to the Harris County Republican Party Senate District convention on March 28th, where they can gain broader support. If successful there, they could reach the Texas Republican Party state convention June 11-13, where delegates shape the official statewide platform. From there, they have the potential to inspire actual legislation in the upcoming Texas Legislature session. I plan to rally supporters, share the resolutions widely, testify if needed, and network with delegates to build momentum. This is how real change starts—from the precinct up. I’m grateful for the opportunity to lead in this way and encourage every Texan to get involved at the local level. Together, we can reclaim medical freedom, accountability, and common-sense policies for our state.

List of Resolutions Passed:

1. Resolution in Support of Vaccine Choice

2. Resolution in Support of the Second Opinion Act

3. Resolution in Support of the Texas mRNA Pharmaceutical Sovereignty and Safety Act

4. Resolution to Ban Remdesivir

5. Resolution in Support of Physician Office Dispensing of Prescription Medications

6. Resolution in Support of Physician Ownership of Hospitals in Texas

7. Resolution Regarding Nonprofit Hospital Property Tax Accountability and Partial Taxation in Texas

8. Resolution to Rescind the DOCTOR Act (HB 2038)

9. Resolution to Address the Physician Shortage in Texas Through Quality-Focused Solutions

10. Resolution to Increase Caps on Non-Economic Damages in Medical Malpractice Cases in Texas

11. Resolution in Support of Reforms to Texas Medical Board Complaint, Rule-making, and Disciplinary Procedures

12. Resolution in Support of Allowing Physicians Certified by the National Board of Physicians and Surgeons (NBPAS) to Advertise as Board Certified

13. Resolution to Oppose REAL ID as a National Surveillance and Domestic Passport System

14. Resolution to Restore Medical Privacy Rights to Patients in Texas

15. Resolution to Restore Affordable Major Medical Indemnity Insurance and Repeal ACA Mandates in Texas

16. Resolution to Protect Freedom of Speech in Professional and Trade Associations

17. Resolution in Support of a New Major Theme Park in Houston

Currently operating primarily in St. Louis (Chesterfield Valley), with additional locations in Iowa and an upcoming expansion to Des Moines, the clinic focuses on restoring cellular health, particularly through mitochondrial function. Dr. James highlights MitoRegen™ (also called Mitochondrial Reboot Protocol), an innovative intravenous therapy that replicates the body’s natural pulsatile insulin signaling. Studies dating back to the 1970s identified microscopic insulin oscillations from the pancreas to the liver, triggering enzymes that enhance mitochondrial efficiency and ATP production. Illness disrupts this signal, causing mitochondria to shift away from glucose utilization and lose energy output.

This therapy uses a specialized pump to deliver tiny, pulsatile doses of regular insulin (typically 10-15 units total over three hours) intravenously, mimicking natural bursts every six minutes. Patients often carb-load beforehand, with blood sugar monitored every 15 minutes to prevent hypoglycemia as awakened mitochondria consume glucose. Research cited in her practice shows a 30% increase in ATP production, with profound effects on conditions like neuropathy—published data indicate 90-95% resolution after 12 treatments. Dr. James shares a striking case of a team member whose chemo-induced burning pain vanished within an hour of starting treatment.

The approach views mitochondria as the “root of the root” problem in chronic illness. Exhausted cells enter survival mode, halting repair and detox processes encoded in DNA. By boosting energy, the therapy empowers innate healing, potentially reversing issues like dementia, stroke damage, fatty liver, and cirrhosis. For vaccine-injured patients—whom Dr. James believes suffered mitochondrial toxicity from spike protein—the treatment holds promise, though many affected individuals face financial and trust barriers five years later.

Complementing this are advanced diagnostics like GlycoCheck, which visualizes the glycocalyx (arterial lining damaged by COVID, contributing to clots, strokes, and heart attacks) via sublingual microscopy, paired with Revasca, a seaweed-based supplement for repair. Other offerings include EBOO (extracorporeal blood oxygenation and ozonation) for filtration of cytokines, spike protein remnants, and debris, plus ozone, oxygen, UV/light therapy; soft hyperbaric chambers for neurologic and wound issues; PRP injections; peptides; and foundational supports like CoQ10, L-carnitine, red light therapy, and detox protocols emphasizing sleep, movement, sunlight, clean diet, and hydration.

Dr. James advocates a holistic concierge model with monthly follow-ups, troubleshooting, and objective testing (e.g., VO2 max) to track progress. She practices telemedicine widely but recommends in-person initial visits for testing.

Despite her clean record and exoneration from prior board scrutiny, Dr. James faces unexplained delays in obtaining a Texas medical license—over 15 months since applying in November of the prior year. She suspects irregularities, noting Texas’s streamlined processes for foreign-trained physicians amid shortages, yet her references (sent multiple times) went unlocated.

Through JamesClinic.com, Dr. James offers hope for those with complex, energy-depleted conditions, prioritizing root-cause restoration over symptom masking. Her work represents a shift toward empowering cellular resilience in an era of rising chronic illness.

Follow Dr. James on X and on Instagram.

In December, the Texas Medical Board issued a public reprimand against me for sending a nurse to Texas Huguley Hospital to give my patient Jason Jones ivermectin. When I sent the nurse, I was following a court order and the advice of my attorney, but in their opinion, I was guilty because Texas Huguley Hospital defied a court order and did not grant me privileges. The patient at the center of this, Deputy Sheriff Jason Jones, never received ivermectin and did not survive.

For the past four years, the case has been wrapped up in the executive branch, first with the Texas Medical Board, then in the State Office of Administrative Hearings (SOAH). Knowing his stance during the pandemic, my lawyers and I were hoping Attorney General Ken Paxton would help expedite the process, but because the case was not in his jurisdiction, his hands were tied. But following the final order from the board in December, I filed an appeal — a lawsuit against the Texas Medical Board — in the Travis County district court, and Attorney General Ken Paxton stepped in.

On February 13th, the state, represented by Attorney General Ken Paxton, filed the following response to my lawsuit against the Texas Medical Board. This was an unprecedented but necessary move against a state agency gone rogue, who has had no oversight and during the pandemic repeatedly abused its power. The Texas Medical Board pursued many doctors for using ivermectin, but I was the only one who fought back. I could have paid a fine and moved on, but I chose to fight on principle. I am grateful to Attorney General Ken Paxton for taking this action. He has refused to represent the board and asked the court to void the public reprimand Texas Medical Board issued against me.

The Backstory

On October 22, 2021, I received a call I will never forget. Though I knew at the time it was significant, I never would have predicted the impact that call would take on my career and the next four years of my life. Most of the pandemic was a blur, but I remember exactly where I was when I first spoke to Erin Jones — after hours, I was sitting at my desk in my bedroom, taking notes with pen and paper, concern mounting as Mrs. Jones told me what was happening to her husband.

Jason Jones was a 49-year-old sheriff’s deputy for Tarrant County, Texas who served his community for twenty-nine years. Prior to the pandemic, he was healthy and took no medications. He was father to three girls and three boys, the youngest was twelve years old when he became ill with COVID.

Erin relayed to me that her husband Deputy Sheriff Jones had been in a medically-induced coma for over a month. His physician at Texas Huguley Hospital, Dr. Jason Seiden, told her he was unlikely to survive and discussions of hospice were brewing. Erin wanted him to try ivermectin — Mr. Jones unsuccessfully tried to get some prior to going to the hospital — but Dr. Seiden refused. The hospital backed Dr. Seiden up, and Erin had no choice but to find a lawyer.

Erin connected with Ralph Lorigo and Beth Parlato, two lawyers who successfully sued hospitals across the country when they refused to allow dying patients the opportunity to try ivermectin. Ralph and Beth had an impressive track record, but the outcomes of their cases basically hinged on the political affiliation of the judge. Of the one hundred eighty-nine cases they worked on, they won half — all ruled by Republican judges. In the cases where they won, all but two of the patients survived. In the cases where they lost, presided over by Democrat judges, all the patients died.

When Erin called, I had just started using ivermectin to treat COVID patients, and though I had only prescribed it to about one hundred and fifty patients at that point, I knew it was safe. I also knew that even in the late stages of the disease, there was a decent chance it could help his condition. A meta-analysis of using ivermectin for COVID patients shows a 40% improvement when ivermectin is used in the late stages of the disease.

I discussed with Erin the possibility of transferring her husband to Houston under the care of Dr. Joe Varon. Dr. Varon, one of the founding members of FLCCC (now Independent Medical Alliance), was having success other ICU doctors weren’t, using ivermectin and a cocktail of other medications not listed in the government’s protocol plan. Understandably, Erin wanted to keep her husband in Ft. Worth, as she had young children at home and the hospital was allowing her to visit him daily.

After talking to Erin, I wanted to help, so I spoke to her attorney Beth. This was a unique situation I had never been in, but I assumed with attorneys involved — who had successfully sued other hospitals using the same strategy, I would be protected. I knew Jason’s ability to receive ivermectin hinged on the outcome of the lawsuit, and I trusted Beth to guide me.

This all unfolded during the third and largest surge of the pandemic. While managing this life-or-death crisis, I was simultaneously treating a flood of patients in my clinic and caring for my four young children at home. The days were interrupted with frantic intermittent calls and texts with Beth and Erin. I’m grateful for those texts because they prove my intentions and actions during the time — texts the Texas Medical Board willfully chose to ignore.

After the hearing where I testified along with Senator Bob Hall, the judge ordered Texas Huguley Hospital to grant me emergency temporary privileges and access to their ICU to administer ivermectin to Jason Jones without delay. I was required to submit an application for privileges, which I accomplished in record time. During the pandemic, CMS stream-lined the hospital privileging process, and doctors were often granted same-day privileges. But Texas Huguley Hospital made me submit the entire application, complete with doctor recommendations and my surgical case-log for the last two years. Somehow I got that done in less than a day and since Jason’s life was hanging on the line, expected the hospital to process and accept immediately.

Instead, they stalled and waited days… announcing on a late Friday afternoon that they were denying my privileges. At that time, I still had a good reputation and a clean record. I had complied with the court order, submitted the application, and there was absolutely no reason for them to deny my application. Texas Huguley Hospital chose to defy a court order rather than allow him to try ivermectin.

Beth went to the judge to complain. She came back and told me to resubmit the entire application (over twenty pages) with a modification specifying that I only intended to give Mr. Jones ivermectin. Again, in record time, I got it done and awaited permission to move forward.

Beth texted me that the hospital appealed, but since there was no stay on the order, we had the green light. I texted back that I was confused and asked for clarification. She reiterated that I had permission to proceed. I had found a local nurse willing to go to the hospital to give Mr. Jones the ivermectin and told her to go. Beth instructed me to email the hospital to give them a warning the nurse was coming. When I did, the administrative secretary told me I didn’t have privileges. Later we would find out that the judge had granted a stay on the order, but neither the administrative secretary nor the hospital’s attorney (who was in contact with Beth) mentioned that, probably on purpose. The notification of the stay had gone to the pro hac vice’s spam folder, and none of us were aware.

When the secretary told me I did not have privileges, I spoke with Beth, and she assured me I could still proceed. I chose to listen to Beth and the court order, rather than the administrative secretary, and that decision cost me over $250,000 in legal fees and over four years of headache.

Mr. Jones was never allowed to get ivermectin. The nurse was greeted by the police when she arrived at the hospital. She left quietly, without disruption. The hospital won their appeal, and after their victory, they wrapped his feeding tube up in towels and ties to prevent anyone from sneaking ivermectin in. His wife Erin rubbed ivermectin on his skin daily (obtained from another source), and he did manage to make it out of the hospital but was unable to make a full recovery and passed away on April 11, 2023. He is survived by his wife Erin and six children. I reached out to his widow Erin yesterday to get an update, and here’s what she said:

“I did talk to Governor Abbott in person when Jason was honored in Austin. He assured me that he would look into your case, but I don’t think he ever did. We think about you and your family all the time. The kids and I are still moving forward trying to keep Jason proud! We have some big life events this year that I am focusing on. Jerry graduates high school. And then starts college in the fall. Wyatt will start his senior year of high school this fall. Our last one!! Savannah is getting married in September. She met the sone of another officer killed in the line of duty. Crazy how that happened! Dakota is working through college. Brittany is engaged and working. Jacob is figuring out work and life. I still have such a hard time reading about our medical and government systems everyday. I am working on my anger issues and trying to learn to forgive. Thank you so much for this update! We continue to pray for you, your family and business.”

Jones family with Senator Bob Hall at the Texas Peace Officers Memorial Ceremony, April 26, 2025.

This has been the most meaningful experience of my career, and I have absolutely no regrets trying to help Mr. Jones. The story illustrates the sad state of our system, where a hospital has the power to ignore a court order and turn the wrath of the licensing board on a physician trying to save her patient’s life. A patient should not have to sue to get a second opinion or try a safe medication in the final effort to survive, but Texas Huguley Hospital fought tooth and nail to deny Mr. Jones those rights.

In the next legislative session, I plan to collaborate with legislators to introduce and pass a law that empowers patients: if a patient is admitted to a hospital where their regular physician does not have privileges, the patient (or their representative) would have the explicit right to bring in their own trusted physician to provide a second opinion, consultation, or collaborative input on their care. This commonsense reform would restore patient choice, strengthen trust in our healthcare system, and ensure that no one faces life-altering medical decisions without access to the physician they know and trust most.