On Call with Dr. Mary Talley Bowden

Transparency, informed consent, and patient empowerment

In-depth interviews with whistleblowers, frontline physicians, veterans, and health freedom advocates who challenge mainstream medical narratives. Episodes explore vaccine safety, bodily autonomy, decentralized healthcare, and critiques of corporate medicine, often drawing from Dr. Bowden's own experiences treating thousands of COVID patients successfully and her legal battles against mandates and censorship. drbowden.substack.com

  1. Apr 30

    White Amyloid Clots: Spike Protein Gone Wild

    Since the rollout of COVID shots in 2021, embalmers worldwide have reported a startling new phenomenon: unusual white, fibrous clots unlike any seen in decades of practice. These rubbery, calamari-like structures, often solid and stretchy, have appeared in 20-30% of corpses according to multiple surveys, primarily in individuals who received mRNA vaccines. Retired U.S. Air Force Major Tom Haviland, a data analyst and engineer, has become a leading voice documenting this issue after his own professional stand against vaccine mandates. 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. Get full access to Dangerous Misinformation at drbowden.substack.com/subscribe

    46 min
  2. Peptides and Hormones: Hype vs Science

    Apr 23

    Peptides and Hormones: Hype vs Science

    Dr. Terri DeNeui, DNP, APRN, ACNP-BC, founder of Evexias and a leading expert in peptide and hormone therapies, discusses regulatory challenges with peptides and the importance of clinical supervision. Insulin and GLP-1 agonists are peptides with an established role in medicine. Now we are seeing broader applications of peptides used for inflammation, autoimmune conditions, muscle preservation, sleep, and tissue repair. 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.” Get full access to Dangerous Misinformation at drbowden.substack.com/subscribe

    46 min
  3. Blood Contamination Crisis: mRNA Shots and the Fight for Safe Transfusions

    Apr 22

    Blood Contamination Crisis: mRNA Shots and the Fight for Safe Transfusions

    The rollout of modified mRNA COVID-19 shots raises profound questions about long-term safety, including their potential persistence in the body and impact on the blood supply. Many individuals, particularly those unvaccinated or concerned about adverse reactions, now seek greater control over blood transfusions during planned surgeries or emergencies. Organizations like Safe Blood address this by matching recipients with donors who share similar vaccination status preferences, reviving practices once considered routine and noncontroversial. Safe Blood, founded in September 2021 by George Della Pietra in Switzerland, operates internationally with a strong U.S. presence across all 50 states. Vice President Clinton Ohlers, who heads media relations, explains that the group facilitates directed donations—where friends, family, or community members donate specifically for a patient—and supports autologous donations, in which patients donate their own blood in advance when time allows the body to regenerate red blood cells. This service proves especially vital when patients require multiple units for complex procedures like C-sections, aneurysm repairs, or cancer surgeries, exceeding what one person can safely provide alone. 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. Get full access to Dangerous Misinformation at drbowden.substack.com/subscribe

    40 min
  4. A COVID Hero Faces 50 Years in Prison: The Ordeal of Dr. Ron Elfenbein

    Apr 6

    A COVID Hero Faces 50 Years in Prison: The Ordeal of Dr. Ron Elfenbein

    In the darkest days of the COVID-19 pandemic, Dr. Ron Elfenbein emerged as a true American hero. An emergency medicine physician and operator of Maryland’s largest monoclonal antibody infusion network, he treated more than 100,000 patients across eight sites with the most effective treatment we had for COVID. Patients arrived on death’s door; within hours, many were dramatically improved. Dr. Elfenbein scaled his practice from six employees to over 300, working around the clock for two years while forgoing time with his own family. His efforts earned him citations from the Maryland governor and state legislature, plus “Person of the Year” honors from the state medical society—even after his indictment. 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. Get full access to Dangerous Misinformation at drbowden.substack.com/subscribe

    32 min
  5. Organ Harvesting and the Illusion of Brain Death

    Apr 1

    Organ Harvesting and the Illusion of Brain Death

    As a trained anesthesiologist and pain medicine specialist, Dr. Heidi Klessig had a pivotal experience as a resident that shattered her assumptions about the definition of brain death and organ harvesting. During night call, Dr. Klessig was assigned to anesthetize a young man declared brain dead after a motorcycle accident for organ procurement. She expected a corpse-like patient but found him warm, pink, with stable vital signs and occasional movements—indistinguishable from other ICU patients. When she proposed a paralyzing agent to prevent movement and fentanyl to stabilize hemodynamics (to protect organs), her attending asked if she planned to administer a drug to block consciousness. Stunned, she replied that he was dead. The attending’s cool suggestion to give it “just in case” planted seeds of doubt. 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. Get full access to Dangerous Misinformation at drbowden.substack.com/subscribe

    47 min
  6. A new treatment for neuropathy

    Feb 17

    A new treatment for neuropathy

    Dr. Mollie James, a board-certified surgeon and critical care specialist, treated critically ill patients during the height of the pandemic, often facing ethical dilemmas when standard treatments were restricted. Her refusal to receive the COVID shot and her commitment to providing what she believed was the best available care led to her dismissal from three ICUs during the Delta wave. Rather than retreating, Dr. James founded The James Clinic, a concierge functional medicine practice born from these experiences, emphasizing integrative, patient-centered approaches over conventional models. 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. Get full access to Dangerous Misinformation at drbowden.substack.com/subscribe

    24 min

  7. Feb 16

    AG Ken Paxton delivers a surprise legal blow to the Texas Medical Board.

    Three days ago, the chief law enforcement officer of Texas broke rank and rebuked a state agency it would normally defend. Fighting the Texas Medical Board the past four years has felt like a major endeavor in futility, but thanks to recent actions by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, the finish line is finally within sight. 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 care

    3 min
  8. Paralyzed from the neck down following the COVID shot.

    Feb 9

    Paralyzed from the neck down following the COVID shot.

    In 2022, Kayla Pollack, a Canadian mother, received the COVID shot under pressure to visit her dying father in long-term care. What followed was a life-altering ordeal that exposed deep flaws in Canada’s healthcare system and vaccine compensation programs. Initially experiencing leg weakness, Pollack awoke one morning paralyzed from the neck down. Diagnosed with transverse myelitis—an autoimmune reaction linked to the vaccine—she spent six months in hospital and rehab, emerging as a quadriplegic. Her story highlights not just personal tragedy but systemic neglect, coercive euthanasia offers, and the erosion of support for the disabled. Pollack’s journey began with dismissal: hospital staff labeled her paralysis psychiatric, despite no prior mental health issues. Only after severe pain and an MRI did they confirm transverse myelitis. Post-discharge, promised home care services vanished, leaving her bedridden and alone for days. Desperate, she returned to the hospital, only to be offered medical assistance in dying (MAID) three times by social workers and doctors. Citing overburdened services and full long-term care facilities, they presented euthanasia as a viable option. Pollack, mother to an 11-year-old son, briefly considered it amid despair but rejected it, emphasizing, “I’m not suicidal; I don’t want to die. I just don’t want to live like this.” The real issue, she argues, is not her paralysis but a healthcare system that prioritizes wars and bureaucracy over basic aid. Costs for wheelchair-accessible transport and modifications soar—$80 for a 15-minute ride versus $26 for a standard taxi—exacerbating isolation. Compounding her struggles is the vaccine injury compensation program. Despite medical records linking her condition to the Moderna shot, Pollack has fought for four years without resolution. An investigation revealed mismanagement: funds squandered on perks like slushy machines and “drinking Fridays,” with only $18 million of $50 million aiding victims. Now under government oversight, the program restarts, eroding her faith. Politicians, including Ontario Premier Doug Ford, deflect responsibility, ignoring her pleas. Meanwhile, Pollack is suing Moderna for $45 million and has overcome their motion to dismiss. Her lawyer anticipates reluctance from the company to reveal redacted documents, potentially exposing hidden risks. Broader implications emerge in Pollack’s critique of MAID’s “slippery slope.” Non-terminally ill individuals, including vaccine-injured or disabled veterans, face offers framed as mercy but rooted in cost-cutting. A Paralympian was suggested euthanasia over a wheelchair ramp; others, like those with post-vaccination syndromes, have accepted it. Pollack warns of eugenics undertones, targeting “non-contributing” members. Yet, she contributes profoundly: raising a compassionate son who earned science awards and dreams of inclusive designs, all inspired by her resilience. Kayla Pollack’s story demands accountability. It reveals how informed consent was undermined by aggressive marketing—Canada’s combined flu-COVID shots persist despite risks—and how vaccine mandates left victims abandoned. Her refusal to succumb underscores human dignity’s value over economic burdens. Society must reform healthcare to support, not euthanize, the vulnerable, ensuring no one is reduced to a “number.” Pollack’s fight is a call for empathy, justice, and true universal care. Learn more about Kayla’s story and donate here. Get full access to Dangerous Misinformation at drbowden.substack.com/subscribe

    47 min
See All (41)

About

In-depth interviews with whistleblowers, frontline physicians, veterans, and health freedom advocates who challenge mainstream medical narratives. Episodes explore vaccine safety, bodily autonomy, decentralized healthcare, and critiques of corporate medicine, often drawing from Dr. Bowden's own experiences treating thousands of COVID patients successfully and her legal battles against mandates and censorship. drbowden.substack.com

Information

  • Creator
    Transparency, informed consent, and patient empowerment
  • Years Active
    2K
  • Episodes
    41
  • Rating
    Clean
  • Copyright
    © Mary Talley Bowden MD
  • Show Website
    On Call with Dr. Mary Talley Bowden

You Might Also Like