Health
Mel Gibson Drops Two Medical Bombshells on the Joe Rogan Podcast

From The Vigilant Fox
Being familiar with alternative cancer therapies, Rogan concluded Gibson was talking about antiparasitic drugs Ivermectin and Fenbendazole, which Gibson confirmed with a nod.
In the final hour of episode #2254 of The Joe Rogan Experience, actor Mel Gibson shared two shocking medical experiences that defy mainstream knowledge.
It all started the moment Anthony Fauci’s name lept out of Gibson’s mouth.
“I don’t know why Fauci’s still walking around… or at least free,” Gibson remarked before revealing that he had “road rage” after listening to RFK Jr.’s book about Anthony Fauci.
Piling on, Joe Rogan quickly dismantled any doubts about the book’s accuracy, arguing that if it were full of lies, RFK Jr. would have been sued into the ground and publicly humiliated.
“First of all, people that don’t believe it. How come RFK Jr. didn’t get sued? How come there’s no lawsuits? If there were lies, there would be lawsuits. You’d be publicly humiliated,” Rogan pointed out.
“That book is an accurate depiction of what Anthony Fauci did during the AIDS crisis, which probably was an AZT crisis. It wasn’t an AIDS crisis.”
The first bombshell dropped when Gibson shared that he “couldn’t walk for three months” after taking Fauci’s pet drug for COVID.
“[Remdesivir] kills you. I found out that afterward. And that’s why I wonder about Fauci,” Gibson said.
“Remdesivir is so lethal it got nicknamed ‘Run Death Is Near’ after it started killing thousands of COVID patients in the hospital,” Stella Paul wrote in a previous report.
“The experts claimed that remdesivir would stop COVID; instead, it stopped kidney function, then blasted the liver and other organs.”
Unfortunately, Gibson’s gardener wasn’t as fortunate. After reportedly receiving the kidney-toxic treatment, he tragically passed away.
“I knew the guy for 20 years, and we both went to the same hospital, and he died, and I didn’t,” Gibson lamented. “I think we both got remdesivir, which is not good.”
While you’re here, please take a few seconds to subscribe for more
reports like this one.
The most jaw-dropping moment happened when Gibson made a statement that could threaten the entire cancer industry.
Gibson revealed that he has three friends who had “stage four cancer,” and now “all three of them don’t have cancer right now at all.”
“And they had some serious stuff going on,” Gibson added.
Rogan asked, “What did they take?”—to which Gibson hesitantly replied, “They took what you’ve heard they’ve taken.”
Being familiar with alternative cancer therapies, Rogan concluded Gibson was talking about antiparasitic drugs Ivermectin and Fenbendazole, which Gibson confirmed with a nod.
Corroborating what Gibson reported to Rogan, cancer surgeon Dr. Kathleen Ruddy revealed to The Epoch Times last year that she has seen several late-stage cancer patients make dramatic recoveries after taking Ivermectin.
One patient had a grim future, and then something remarkable happened. This man had stage four prostate cancer and tried all the conventional protocols before doctors told him that there was nothing they could do.
Then, he started taking ivermectin…
Within six months, the metastatic lesions began to disappear, and in less than a year, “he was out dancing for four hours” three nights per week, according to Dr. Ruddy.
A similar scenario unfolded for another man named Eddie. He was also in bad shape.
Eddie was diagnosed with two unresectable esophageal tumors that surgeons wouldn’t go near. He was a smoker, couldn’t swallow, and had lost 40 pounds in a year and a half.
“Within a couple of weeks, he sounded stronger. He could swallow. He had gained six pounds. His voice was better,” reported Dr. Ruddy.
Several weeks later, Dr. Ruddy said to Eddie, “You need to get a scan.”
Guess what happened?
“We got the scan. No tumors. Gone. Gone. The problem was that he had sold his fishing boat. That was the biggest problem. He was getting better. His tumor was gone. Now he’s got to buy another fishing boat … I was like, ‘Well, now, that’s interesting.’”
Recently, anecdotal reports have also praised Fenbendazole as a potentially miraculous anti-cancer drug.
It reportedly works by destabilizing microtubules, the structures that help cancer cells divide and grow.
By disrupting this process, Fenbendazole is believed to effectively halt cancer cell division and slow or stop tumor growth.
A case series published in 2020 documented three cancer patients who experienced complete remission after taking Fenbendazole.
“FBZ (Fenbendazole) appears to be a potentially safe and effective antineoplastic agent that can be repurposed for human use in treating genitourinary malignancies.’”
Adding to the growing evidence in support of Fendendazole’s use case against cancer, an Oklahoma man credited his miraculous cancer recovery to the pet med after overcoming terminal small cell lung cancer, defying a less than 1% survival rate and leaving doctors baffled.
EDMOND, Okla. — When you tell someone a medicine for dogs cured your cancer, you better be ready for some skeptics, but Joe Tippens says it saved his life, and the lives of others.
Now, even cancer researchers are open to the possibility it might be true.
“My stomach, my neck, my liver, my pancreas, my bladder, my bones — it was everywhere,” Tippens said.
Tippens said he was told to go home, call hospice and say his goodbyes two years ago.
The doctors were unanimous, he was going to die of small cell lung cancer.
“Once that kind of cancer goes that far afield, the odds of survival are less than 1 percent, and median life expectancy is three months,” Tippens said.
Tippens said he went from 220 pounds to 110.
“I was a skeleton with skin hanging off of it,” he said. “It was difficult.”
But that was January of 2017. Today, Tippens is very much alive and what he credits for his survival has doctors scratching their heads, and the rest of us raising eyebrows.
“About half the people think I’m just crazy,” he said. “And about half the people want to know more and dig deeper.”
Tippens said he received a tip from a veterinarian, of all people. And in his desperation, he turned from people medicine to dog medicine.
Specifically, something you give your dog when it has worms.
“The truth is stranger than fiction, you know?” Tippens said, laughing.
Just three months later, Tippens says, his cancer was gone.
Thanks for reading! If you enjoyed this post, please do me a quick favor and follow this page (@VigilantFox) for more reports like this one.
Health
Last day and last chance to win this dream home! Support the 2025 Red Deer Hospital Lottery before midnight!

Deadline: June 16, 2025
Draw: June 26, 2025
|
|
|
The 2025 Red Deer Hospital Lottery Dream Home, designed by Sorento Custom Homes, continues Sorento’s tradition of award-winning designs. This gorgeous bungalow features 2,824 sq ft of developed living space and showcases a tall, vaulted ceiling.
Located at 128 Emmett Crescent in the neighbourhood of Evergreen, this outstanding home features a screened deck off the dining room, a large family room on the lower level, and of course, a beautiful primary suite. Sorento’s ensuites are always something to behold, and this one features a claw foot tub. There’s an office on the main level, two bedrooms below, and a large fitness room that includes a two-person infrared sauna. Enjoy the convenience of a walk-in pantry, main floor laundry, and chef quality appliances. The design of this unique home is complemented by gorgeous furnishings by Urban Barn.
Our Grand Prize Dream Home package is valued at $1,074,472! You won’t want to miss seeing this outstanding home or your chance to live in it.
Aristotle Foundation
The Canadian Medical Association’s inexplicable stance on pediatric gender medicine

By Dr. J. Edward Les
The thalidomide saga is particularly instructive: Canada was the last developed country to pull thalidomide from its shelves — three months during which babies continued to be born in this country with absent or deformed limbs
Physicians have a duty to put forward the best possible evidence, not ideology, based treatments
Late last month, the Canadian Medical Association (CMA) announced that it, along with three Alberta doctors, had filed a constitutional challenge to Alberta’s Bill 26 “to protect the relationship between patients, their families and doctors when it comes to making treatment decisions.”
Bill 26, which became law last December, prohibits doctors in the province from prescribing puberty blockers and hormone therapies for those under 16; it also bans doctors from performing gender-reassignment surgeries on minors (those under 18).
The unprecedented CMA action follows its strongly worded response in February 2024 to Alberta’s (at the time) proposed legislation:
“The CMA is deeply concerned about any government proposal that restricts access to evidence-based medical care, including the Alberta government’s proposed restrictions on gender-affirming treatments for pediatric transgender patients.”
But here’s the problem with that statement, and with the CMA’s position: the evidence supporting the “gender affirmation” model of care — which propels minors onto puberty blockers, cross-gender hormones, and in some cases, surgery — is essentially non-existent. That’s why the United Kingdom’s Conservative government, in the aftermath of the exhaustive four-year-long Cass Review, which laid bare the lack of evidence for that model, and which shone a light on the deeply troubling potential for the model’s irreversible harm to youth, initiated a temporary ban on puberty blockers — a ban made permanent last December by the subsequent Labour government. And that’s why other European jurisdictions like Finland and Sweden, after reviews of gender affirming care practices in their countries, have similarly slammed the brakes on the administration of puberty blockers and cross-gender hormones to minors.
It’s not only the Europeans who have raised concerns. The alarm bells are ringing loudly within our own borders: earlier this year, a group at McMaster University, headed by none other than Dr. Gordon Guyatt, one of the founding gurus of the “evidence-based care” construct that rightfully underpins modern medical practice, issued a pair of exhaustive systematic reviews and meta analyses that cast grave doubts on the wisdom of prescribing these drugs to youth.
And yet, the CMA purports to be “deeply concerned about any government proposal that restricts access to evidence-based medical care,” which begs the obvious question: Where, exactly, is the evidence for the benefits of the “gender affirming” model of care? The answer is that it’s scant at best. Worse, the evidence that does exist, points, on balance, to infliction of harm, rather than provision of benefit.
CMA President Joss Reimer, in the group’s announcement of the organization’s legal action, said:
“Medicine is a calling. Doctors pursue it because they are compelled to care for and promote the well-being of patients. When a government bans specific treatments, it interferes with a doctor’s ability to empower patients to choose the best care possible.”
Indeed, we physicians have a sacred duty to pursue the well-being of our patients. But that means that we should be putting forward the best possible treatments based on actual evidence.
When Dr. Reimer states that a government that bans specific treatments is interfering with medical care, she displays a woeful ignorance of medical history. Because doctors don’t always get things right: look to the sad narratives of frontal lobotomies, the oxycontin crisis, thalidomide, to name a few.
The thalidomide saga is particularly instructive: it illustrates what happens when a government drags its heels on necessary action. Canada was the last developed country to pull thalidomide, given to pregnant women for morning sickness, from its shelves, three months after it had been banned everywhere else — three months during which babies continued to be born in this country with absent or deformed limbs, along with other severe anomalies. It’s a shameful chapter in our medical past, but it pales in comparison to the astonishing intransigence our medical leaders have displayed — and continue to display — on the youth gender care file.
A final note (prompted by thalidomide’s history), to speak to a significant quibble I have with Alberta’s Bill 26 legislation: as much as I admire Premier Danielle Smith’s courage in bringing it forward, the law contains a loophole allowing minors already on puberty blockers and cross-gender hormones to continue to take them. Imagine if, after it was removed from the shelves in 1962, government had allowed pregnant women already on the drug to continue to take thalidomide. Would that have made any sense? Of course not. And the same applies to puberty blockers and cross-gender hormones: they should be banned outright for all youth.
That argument is the kind our medical associations should be making — and would be making, if they weren’t so firmly in the grasp, seemingly, of ideologues who have abandoned evidence-based medical care for our youth.
J. Edward Les is a Calgary pediatrician, a senior fellow with the Aristotle Foundation for Public Policy, and co-author of “Teenagers, Children, and Gender Transition Policy: A Comparison of Transgender Medical Policy for Minors in Canada, the United States, and Europe.”
-
Health4 hours ago
Last day and last chance to win this dream home! Support the 2025 Red Deer Hospital Lottery before midnight!
-
Aristotle Foundation7 hours ago
The Canadian Medical Association’s inexplicable stance on pediatric gender medicine
-
Business1 day ago
Carney’s European pivot could quietly reshape Canada’s sovereignty
-
Alberta1 day ago
Alberta’s grand bargain with Canada includes a new pipeline to Prince Rupert
-
Crime1 day ago
Manhunt on for suspect in shooting deaths of Minnesota House speaker, husband
-
Bruce Dowbiggin9 hours ago
WOKE NBA Stars Seems Natural For CDN Advertisers. Why Won’t They Bite?
-
conflict10 hours ago
“Evacuate”: Netanyahu Warns Tehran as Israel Expands Strikes on Iran’s Military Command
-
Energy10 hours ago
Could the G7 Summit in Alberta be a historic moment for Canadian energy?