Dr. Elizabeth Lee Vliet has gathered a collection of prominent medical and scientific experts, including Dr. Peter McCullough and Dr. Michael Yeadon, to provide public resources for treating COVID-19 safely and effectively, as well as assessing the risks of its experimental gene therapy.
In an exclusive interview with LifeSiteNews, Vliet revealed how her clinical experience and medical research had affected her understanding of COVID-19 and the mRNA jabs.
“The fundamental principle in internal medicine in treating a viral illness is you treat it early. And you use what you have available,” Vliet added, “the longer people went without treatment, the more it moved into serious inflammation that was doing damage, and blood clots.”
“I was determined that my patients would not die on my watch, if I could do something to help them. And it made no sense that someone from Washington who doesn’t treat patients, was saying, ‘Go home and get sicker, and then go to the hospital’. No, no, that’s not how medicine works,” she continued.
Vliet said her research soon turned up a 2005 report “that Anthony Fauci’s own agency had published in their own journal of virology,” demonstrating that “hydroxychloroquine [and] chloroquine were potent antivirals of then SARS COV-1.”
Vliet observed that hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin had no serious side effects in her patients. Furthermore, she learned about experimental mRNA jab adverse effects, which she claims were far more harmful than previously thought.
The doctor added that she started receiving reports that the “COVID jabs” were “affecting the testicle [in men] and the ovary in women.”
“Because I saw immediately that if we had data to show the female ovaries were damaged by the spike protein that the mRNA vaccines tricked your body to make, and if male testicles were damaged by the spike protein, we didn’t just have a fertility problem, we had a long term health problem affecting all the other organ systems: the brain, the heart, the lungs, the bones, the muscles, the immune system, the gut,” she added.
“Everything in the body is regulated with the metabolic effects of these critical reproductive hormones.”
She also had to treat those who had developed complications as a result of the jab, saying:
“And the risk of the medicines I was using was miniscule. So I didn’t have any serious effects with hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin. I didn’t have those problems with the patients for the treatment, but I sure was seeing it after people got this experimental jab,” Vliet said.
Furthermore, Vliet claims that the “coordinated government-media-big tech collusion” lies about the COVID vaccine’s effectiveness to “drive people” to take it.
“And the tragedy of it is that people are being totally lied to, when they are using the Delta variant as a reason to rush out to get the experimental COVID shot, because the COVID shots don’t protect against the Delta variant. And the Delta variant is the mildest of all of them. It’s like a bad cold.”
She says that as viruses get more transmissible, they become less harmful, which is “basic virology 101.”
Vliet lamented that just a few doctors are speaking out against “medical information suppression,” and that even these doctors are being silenced.
When questioned if there was any precedent for the suppression of medical information, Vliet replied, “Never in my career, never ever has there been this degree of censorship across the board: medical boards, governors, media outlets, government agencies, health systems, hospitals, medical schools, research institutions.”
According to Vliet not only are people’s voices being muted but medical information is being suppressed and misrepresented.
She responded to research published in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) that claimed that “although not directly comparable,” adverse pregnancy effects in women who had the COVID-19 vaccine were “similar to incidences” studied before the COVID-19 pandemic.
The study “actually had a conclusion that was not supported by the data in the article,” stated Vliet. “Independent epidemiologists reviewed the data and showed that the data in the article did not support the conclusion that was stated verbally. So then, they didn’t retract the paper, they just removed the data tables so that no one could analyze it again. So that should tell you about the reliability of the NEJM article.”
When asked why she believes medical knowledge is being censored and suppressed, Vliet replied, “There are 3 things that tend to motivate decisions like this: Money, power, and control.”
“They are directing the money expenditures to healthcare to the highest cost settings, which are hospitals. So the hospitals are making a fortune with the high cost of taking care of people in the hospital. They’re benefiting, big time.”
Pharmaceutical companies benefit when “new experimental high cost medicines and vaccines and all these new expensive options” are being pushed “instead of the low cost generic medicines that cost a few dollars.”
“And then we look at power. What have many of the governors done? They’ve consolidated their power.”
“So people are blindly going into one of the largest experiments in human history, asking no questions, and that’s not what they do in any other aspects of their lives. So the common sense thing to me is, why wouldn’t you be asking these questions? And why wouldn’t we as doctors ask these questions? It’s irresponsible to ignore them.”