Joe Rogan Experience #1671 - Bret Weinstein & Dr. Pierre Kory
Dr. Pierre Kory (guest), Bret Weinstein (guest), Joe Rogan (host), Guest (Bret Weinstein or Dr. Pierre Kory) (guest), Narrator, Narrator, Narrator
In this episode of The Joe Rogan Experience, featuring Dr. Pierre Kory and Bret Weinstein, Joe Rogan Experience #1671 - Bret Weinstein & Dr. Pierre Kory explores scientists allege ivermectin suppression, censorship worsening global COVID outcomes Joe Rogan hosts evolutionary biologist Bret Weinstein and ICU physician Dr. Pierre Kory to argue that ivermectin is a safe, effective, and massively underused treatment and prophylactic for COVID-19.
Scientists allege ivermectin suppression, censorship worsening global COVID outcomes
Joe Rogan hosts evolutionary biologist Bret Weinstein and ICU physician Dr. Pierre Kory to argue that ivermectin is a safe, effective, and massively underused treatment and prophylactic for COVID-19.
They claim dozens of studies and real‑world data show strong benefits—especially with early use and prevention—yet major health agencies and platforms like YouTube suppress discussion in favor of patented, high‑profit drugs and vaccines.
The conversation links this to regulatory and media “capture,” emergency use authorizations, and a broader pattern of pandemic missteps, including the early lab‑leak dismissal and delayed acceptance of airborne transmission and steroids.
They warn that censorship of qualified dissent prevents scientific self‑correction, may have cost countless lives globally, and argue that open debate and rapid application of repurposed drugs could still drive COVID toward extinction.
Key Takeaways
Ivermectin has a large, mostly positive evidence base for COVID treatment and prevention.
Kory and Weinstein cite over 60 controlled trials (including ~24 RCTs) and multiple meta‑analyses showing significant reductions in infection, hospitalization, and death, particularly when used early or prophylactically.
Get the full analysis with uListen AI
Early outpatient treatment can dramatically reduce severe COVID and ICU burden.
They argue that using ivermectin alongside combination protocols (steroids, vitamin C, anticoagulants, etc. ...
Get the full analysis with uListen AI
Real‑world programs in countries like Mexico, India, and Argentina are presented as strong supportive evidence.
Examples include Mexico’s IMSS test‑and‑treat program and certain Indian states, where rapid declines in hospitalizations and deaths followed mass ivermectin distribution, which they say aligns with trial data.
Get the full analysis with uListen AI
Major health bodies’ positions on COVID drugs and policies appear inconsistent and politically influenced.
They highlight contradictions such as WHO vs CDC on airborne transmission and remdesivir, and suggest WHO’s and Merck’s downplaying of ivermectin reflect economic and political pressures rather than neutral science.
Get the full analysis with uListen AI
Censorship of medical debate is portrayed as actively harmful to public health.
YouTube strikes against Weinstein’s interviews (including Kory and mRNA pioneer Robert Malone) and takedowns of Kory’s Senate testimony are framed as blocking exactly the kind of open, corrective scientific dialogue that identified steroids and airborne spread.
Get the full analysis with uListen AI
Pharmaceutical incentives and EUA rules may help explain ivermectin resistance.
They argue that if a safe, effective treatment exists, it threatens emergency use authorizations and profit models for vaccines and new antivirals; this creates structural pressure to deny or minimize ivermectin’s efficacy.
Get the full analysis with uListen AI
Spike protein–related harms may link COVID, long COVID, and some post‑vaccine issues.
Weinstein and Kory discuss evidence that the spike protein is cytotoxic and can circulate beyond the injection site, hypothesizing that ivermectin’s anti‑inflammatory and possible spike‑binding properties may explain reported improvements in long COVID and post‑vaccine syndromes.
Get the full analysis with uListen AI
Notable Quotes
“This is a treatable disease. We do have an outpatient treatment for it.”
— Dr. Pierre Kory
“By insisting on large randomized controlled trials as the only evidence, you’re signing up for new, expensive patented drugs over cheap repurposed ones.”
— Bret Weinstein
“The suppression of ivermectin… the incalculable loss of life and prolongation and worsening of this, not only in the US, across the world—incalculable doesn’t even come close.”
— Dr. Pierre Kory
“Any time somebody decides they are going to upgrade conversation by forbidding certain things from being mentioned, you’ve created a tool that will inevitably be captured.”
— Bret Weinstein
“There’s never been a time where censorship has led to a societal good.”
— Joe Rogan
Questions Answered in This Episode
How strong and methodologically sound is the total ivermectin evidence base once independently re‑analyzed, including potential publication bias and trial quality?
Joe Rogan hosts evolutionary biologist Bret Weinstein and ICU physician Dr. ...
Get the full analysis with uListen AI
What concrete safeguards could separate legitimate medical debate from truly harmful misinformation without empowering captured institutions to silence dissent?
They claim dozens of studies and real‑world data show strong benefits—especially with early use and prevention—yet major health agencies and platforms like YouTube suppress discussion in favor of patented, high‑profit drugs and vaccines.
Get the full analysis with uListen AI
If ivermectin’s prophylactic effect is as large as claimed, what would a realistic, ethically acceptable global rollout strategy look like in parallel with vaccines?
The conversation links this to regulatory and media “capture,” emergency use authorizations, and a broader pattern of pandemic missteps, including the early lab‑leak dismissal and delayed acceptance of airborne transmission and steroids.
Get the full analysis with uListen AI
How should regulators handle conflicts of interest and EUA rules to avoid perverse incentives that favor high‑profit drugs over repurposed generics in future pandemics?
They warn that censorship of qualified dissent prevents scientific self‑correction, may have cost countless lives globally, and argue that open debate and rapid application of repurposed drugs could still drive COVID toward extinction.
Get the full analysis with uListen AI
What kind of transparent, head‑to‑head trials or real‑world data would be necessary to convince major agencies to revise guidelines on ivermectin—or definitively rule it out?
Get the full analysis with uListen AI
Transcript Preview
(drumming) Joe Rogan podcast, check it out.
The Joe Rogan Experience.
Train by day, Joe Rogan podcast by night. All day. (rock music plays) So, this is the first of ... I've never had to do an emergency podcast before. But it, I feel like we do. And Brett, you and I have been in communication about this and this se- seemed like something that we have to do quicker than later. Um, let's explain what's going on. Uh, you guys have had conversations, uh, first of all, uh, Dr. Kory, please explain who you are and introduce yourself.
Yeah, sure. So, (clears throat) I'm a lung and ICU specialist, um, who's part of a group of, um, other ICU specialists. We came together early in the pandemic, uh, to develop treatment protocols for COVID. Um, we first developed a hospital treatment protocol back in March, um, and then more recently, we have an outpatient treatment protocol centered around the drug Ivermectin, and I'll just say, through our work, um, I would say we are probably the foremost experts on the use of Ivermectin and COVID in the world.
And how did you, uh, Brett, how did you get involved with Dr. Kory, and how did your initial conversation get in, uh, get started? What's ...
Well, Heather and I have been podcasting on the developing COVID story, uh, for quite some time. We started very early and, uh, we actually, I just took the Dark Horse podcast, which had been just me talking to people, and Heather and I started live streaming twice a week at first. And at first, we were just simply looking at the evidence on COVID, what it is, how it transmits, how it should change your behavior. You know, in those early days, it was scary. We didn't know if it was transmitted on surfaces or what. So, Heather and I just, uh, did our analysis live, or not live. I guess it was live, but in any case, the two of us just, uh, had discussions about what we thought the evidence meant and we presented papers that we were reading in the literature.
And we should explain your credentials, like what ...
I'm a, I'm a biologist. I'm an evolutionary biologist. Um, the importance of evolution here is that A, all of the things that we're talking about with COVID are evolutionary. Obviously, the virus is evolved. Epidemiology is an evolutionary, uh, process. The immune system is both a, a product of evolution and it evolves in real time when you have an infection. So, evolution is a kind of good generalist toolkit to apply to something like COVID. But in any case, as we were working through the various emerging evidence and figuring out what we believed and what we didn't and why, we ran into Ivermectin, and there was this indication that it was effective against COVID, and we didn't know what to make of it. We didn't know whether or not there was something-
Install uListen to search the full transcript and get AI-powered insights
Get Full TranscriptGet more from every podcast
AI summaries, searchable transcripts, and fact-checking. Free forever.
Add to Chrome