There is a page named "FLCCC" on Wikipedia
-
Foot Locker Cross Country Championships (redirect from FLCCC)comprises the heartland states and is by far the largest region in the FLCCC series, which has states including: Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, North Dakota22 KB (1,312 words) - 14:19, 31 May 2021
There is discussion, on Wikipedia, of the currently significant FLCCC, but is is spread through different headings, which we'll try to consolidate here.
In March 2020, doctors were encouraged not to treat covid patients, and to advise rest in bed and fluids. The French Minister of Health recommended acetaminophen.
The acetaminophen/fluids protocol of watchful waiting was easy for fearful doctors to support, since it helped them avoid patients and contagion. "it's not cowardice, it's the Minister's direct orders.
Then there were curious medics, who began to connect to each other, discussing the situation on line. They read that China was using chloroquine and they tried it. Then they tried the safer hydroxychloroquine ("HCQ").
In the United States, the use of ivermectin for COVID-19 is championed by a group calling itself the "Frontline COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance" (FLCCC), which says it heads "the global movement to move #Ivermectin into the mainstream". The effort has gone viral on social media, where it has been adopted by COVID deniers, anti-vaccination proponents, and conspiracy theorists.[359]
Wikieditors' attacks on ivermectin and FLCCC appear at different locations. Much disinformation appears under the voice COVID-19 Misinformation. Wikipsyops decided it would be best not to give FLCCC heading, so we'll have to create one, uniting different Wikipedia falsifications.
What is FlCCC? According to the Wikieditors, it's not a medical association, whose members have cured tens of thousands of covid patients with minimal casualties, it's "a group" that makes videos that go "viral on social media", for "COVID deniers, anti-vaccination proponents, and conspiracy theorists.[359] "
The vaccine dissidents still can make videos, but must head off to the reservation, to be heard. Not allowed on Town Square, which YouTube has become.
As for the medical press, the V Cult boys get orders to head them off at the pass. They visit the medical journals, and can be persuasive.
How often has that happened? All we know is that the V Cult boys have good fast horses and carry big sticks. So far, they have managed to get to the medical journals editors in time, before publication.
Did they have thoughtful legal advice to give? They just say, "You may publish this article, but there might be unintended consequences. We wouldn't want to see that, would we?"
In December 2020, Chair of the US Senate Homeland Security Committee Ron Johnson used a Senate hearing to promote fringe theories about COVID-19.[415] Among the witnesses was Pierre Kory, a pulmonary and critical care doctor, who erroneously described ivermectin as "miraculous" and as a "wonder drug" to be used against COVID-19. Video footage of his statements went viral on social media, receiving over one million views as of 11 December.[416]
In the United Kingdom, Andrew Hill, a senior research fellow at Liverpool University, posted a video of a draft meta-analysis that went viral before it was removed.[417] An evidence-based review of Dr. Hill's paper by scientists at the Interdisciplinary Centre for Health Studies in Valparaíso, Chile found "serious methodological limitations" which cast the findings into doubt.[418]
Here is the strategy for the Two Minutes Medical Hate--for background, please see Two Minutes Hate: a. find a Goldstein; b. start with an insulting putdown; c. Present Goldstein going viral, note how many fall for his lies; d. do not discuss details of Goldstein evil ideology; e. point out Goldstein's vague "methodological" issues; f. cheer Goldstein's fiery demise by censorship;
The regime chooses to emphasizes its reliance on censorship. It's not done in silence, but loudly, ceremoniously, proudly, with much flag waving.
The Two Minute Hate culminates with Jen Psaki applauding wildly as Goldstein goes down in flames.
Ignore the tragic, moving appeal that Dr. Kory presented at a U.S. Senate hearing, asking to be allowed to treat patients with effective medication. Censure the YouTube recording uploaded by U.S. Senator Johnson. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8RyV3VEDKI. https://www.bitchute.com/video/NSil15MibqlM/
Nine months before the blessed vaccine arrived, President Trump had made some silly but truthful remarks about hydroxychloroquine ("HCQ"). Dr. Fauci, standing next to the president, falsely corrected the President, who meekly tolerated it. Neither did he challenge Dr. Fauci treatment or present the great doctors who were saving their patients.
Since Trump had proposed it, the Wiki psyops hated HCQ, and deceived people about its value and eventual uses against Covid-19, in the first days of the illness, when the virus is being shed.
Then they learned that ivermectin works better than HCQ, and they turned their heavy censoring artillery from the HCQ to the IVR quadrant.
A review article by Kory, Paul E. Marik, and others on the efficacy of ivermectin, which had been provisionally accepted for publication by a Frontiers Media journal, was subsequently rejected on account of what the publisher said were "a series of strong, unsupported claims based on studies with insufficient statistical significance" meaning that the article did "not offer an objective [or] balanced scientific contribution to the evaluation of ivermectin as a potential treatment for COVID-19".[358]. https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/frontiers-removes-controversial-ivermectin-paper-pre-publication-68505
Should infidel medics even place their screeds with a serious journal, the editors might get calls from important people.
The argument presented to the editor could be simple: a. Fred, you can't break with the scientific community, we have held out for a year now against ivermectin, and your article would hurt the vax campaign. b. Fred, the vice president is incensed, she says their blood would be on you! c. Fred, we were planning this campaign with Frontier...Now, however... d. Fred, you will be sorry, very very sorry.
Somehow, Frontier in Pharmacology quickly learned the proper definition of statistical significance, and abandoned old-fashioned peer review for progressive peer review: that, occurs when important progressives make a couple of phone call.
In this case, Wiki psyops tried to protect the honor of Frontier Media editor with that deftly placed "provisionally." It's questionable whether an article announced as accepted, and whose abstract is already published on the journal's website, can be said to be provisionally accepted. Three of four editors of the issue on Covid-19 treatment resigned in protest.
Besides the statistical insufficiency, Frontiers Media explained that “Further, the authors promoted their own specific ivermectin-based treatment which is inappropriate for a review article and against our editorial policies. In our view, this paper does not offer an objective nor balanced scientific contribution to the evaluation of ivermectin as a potential treatment for COVID-19.”
So now they say they would have expected a balanced response from the doctors who have, against heavy pressure from the government and from their hospital directors, saved thousand of patients.
From the doctors who, through trial and error, over many months, had developed the best protocols to save the lives of patients in different stages of the illness, Frederick Fenter, editor of Frontiers Media, expected silence about the success of their protocols.
Does that make sense? Is that credible? If those were the actual issues, Frontier Media would have asked for a change before rejecting the article. All evidence suggests that someone made an offer that Frederick Fenter could not refuse. Or that Frederick Fenter found a horse's head in his bed. Is this overdramatic? We are dealing with vaccine billionaires, fellows who can afford to pay well for a hit. And poor Fred may have a horse or a dog or kids.
During the pandemic, a number of misleading websites appeared purporting to show meta-analyses of clinical evidence in favour of ivermectin and sporting colorful graphics. While these gained traction in social media they violated the necessary norms of scientific practice, and the misinformation they contained created confusion among the public and policy makers.[357]
[NEW VERSION]
During the pandemic, a number of misleading websites appeared purporting to show meta-analyses of clinical evidence in favor of ivermectin's use in treating COVID-19.[418][419] The sites in question had anonymous owners, multiple domains which redirected to the same content,and used many colorful, but misleading, graphics to communicate their point.[420][418] The web servers used for these sites are the same as those previously used to spread misinformation about hydroxychloroquine.[421]
This Wikipedia section gives us other answers, it's a window into the thinking of the regime. Quite remarkably, dark thoughts are manifested, about how to manage that most bothersome issue, freedom of the press, that created so much "confusion among the public and policy makers."
The "misleading websites" offer "colourful graphics", by which they hope to trick the ignorant masses. That's how they hope to fool the deplorables into straying from the true Faith.
Looks like the Vaccine Cultists who control all dailies, and all weekly and monthly magazines, all radio and TV stations and all channels, are concerned that some websites have still escaped their control. But they are investigating, and are looking into all possible options.
The website owners use certain servers. Could those companies be convinced to step aside, just like Fred did? Guys that run website servers, are they immune from financial pressures?
Wikipedia has just said that it is appropriate to pressure journal editors to cancel publication of embarrassing information. Then they say that certain servers continue to publish information about things that Wikipedia editors do not want to hear about. The obvious suggestion is that there should be similar pressure upon the servers who publish unpleasant information.
Are we revisiting the 20's in Italy? One hundred years ago, a major weapon of control for the rising fascist movement was the attack against workers' small printing presses.
They have not done it yet, but they are definitely thinking about it.