Question Ivermectin has been shown very effective against Covid-19 infections - why is no one talking about it ?

Jul 2, 2020
234
27
130
Effective Covid-19 treatment could alreay be available. See youtube video interview with Australian Professor Thomas Borody - link at very end - he provides his opinion on why an already effective treatment has been sidelined.

Ivermectin (IVM) has been shown very effective in reversing Covid-19 within 24 - 48 hours in US Florida hospital patients whose oxygen intake was down and eliminating Covid-19 shortly after.

“It has very few side effects, and is a real killer of coronavirus,” Australian Professor Borody

This is an old well established drug widely used on people.

IVM has completed some Covid-19 human trials with up to 100% success rate in infected patients and removing Covid-19 within approx 5 days

Lab studies in vitro have shown IVM kills Covid-19 in 24-48 hours.

It has been used in 4 USA Florida Hospitals on patients with Covid-19 with a paper published. The results indicate IVM was very successful in reducing mortality of patients with severe of Covid-19 - 50% compared to the control group - improvement and stablization with 1-2 days

Ivermectin (IVM), a macrocyclic lactone of Nobel Prize-winning distinction has been given to humam patients in USA hospitals but its success has not been discussed

A retrospective study of 173 COVID-19 patients treated with IVM in four Florida hospitals at a dose of 200 µg/kg yielded a 40% reduction in mortality compared with 107 controls (15.0% vs. 25.2%, p=0.03). Mortality was cut by 52% with IVM for patients having severe pulmonary disease (38.8% vs. 80.7%, p=0.001). Stabilization and then improvement over 1-2 days frequently occurred for patients who had rapidly deteriorating oxygen status.

It is proposed that higher doses of IVM could yield sharply greater clinical benefits. In several clinical studies, IVM at doses of up to 2,000 µg/kg, ten times that used in the Florida study, were well tolerated.



However in the US there has been a reluctance to follow up on the human treatment results despite the paper published

See study below



"if their oxygen requirements are less than 50%, I’ve had nearly a 100% response rate, they all improve, if they’re on more oxygen than that, then it becomes a little more varied, some people, they don’t respond anymore because they are too far advanced,” explained Dr. Rajter.

The local health authority, Broward Board of Health, recently approved Dr. Rajter’s protocol for use in all of their hospitals


These USA results have in replicated in China, Iraq and Bangladesh

View the links below for info and clinical trials and their status from completed phase 1 etc+






A similar study on Ivermectin was conducted by a research team of Monash University in Australia and also showed positive results
An anti-parasitic drug repurposed for Covid-19 treatment has helped patients fully recover from the infection in just four days.
The medicine can kill the novel Sars-CoV-2 coronavirus in just 48 hours.
Prof Tarek Alam, a doctor of internal medicine and respiratory diseases who leads the clinical trial program at Bangladesh Medical College (BMC), said: “Sixty coronavirus patients were tested. Taking doxycycline with a single dose of ivermectin reduced the patient's symptoms by 50% in just 3 days, and they were completely virus-free in 4 days.
“If we had applied for this medicine earlier, we would not have lost so many people in the country,” he added.
A similar study on Ivermectin was conducted by a research team of Monash University in Australia and also showed positive results.
On April 3 this year, the journal "Antiviral Research" showed that infecting the Vero-hSLAM cell line with the novel coronavirus and applying Ivermectin reduced the amount of virus in the cell line by up to 5,000 times in 48 hours.
The scientists said Ivermectin is an approved anti-parasitic drug that has also been shown to be effective in vitro against a broad range of viruses including HIV, Dengue, Influenza, and the Zika virus.
“Ivermectin is very widely used and seen as safe medicine.


View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=F6A6RFDprIs


Published on Aug 7, 2020
Australian Gastroenterologist Professor Thomas Borody says Ivermectin used in conjunction with two other drugs is making it look like “corona is very simple to kill”. The drug is Federal Drug Agency and World Health Organisation approved; it is widely used for parasitic infections and is being cited and prescribed as treatment against the deadly coronavirus. “It has very few side effects, and is a real killer of coronavirus,” Professor Borody told Sky News host Chris Kenny.





Why are we ignoring the potential cure under our noses?
Rebecca Weisser

8 August 2020 9:00 AM

....Covid cure that cut the mortality rate of even the sickest patients by 50 per cent..... so safe that it was already being used in aged-care homes to treat nothing more threatening than scabies and cost next to nothing.

On 3 April, Dr Kylie Wagstaff, working at the Monash University Biomedicine Discovery Institute, with a team from the Peter Doherty Institute of Infection and Immunity, the University of Melbourne and the Royal Melbourne Hospital, announced that the anti-parasitic drug ivermectin kills the Sars-2 virus in a petri dish within 48 hours.

Ivermectin is already considered a wonder drug. In 2015, William Campbell and Satoshi Omura shared the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for its discovery, which has transformed the lives of millions of people in Africa, Asia and Latin America, since its introduction in 1987 to treat a range of parasite infections from head lice to river blindness.

In America, it took only 48 hours after Wagstaff’s announcement for doctors to start using the drug, off-label, and saving lives....the use of the drug in Broward County Medical Centre, with extraordinary results.....and mortality dropped by 48 per cent; even in patients on high-flow oxygen or already intubated...

The results everywhere have been extremely encouraging, Wagstaff says. Dr Tarek Alam of the Bangladesh Medical Centre used ivermectin and the antibiotic doxycycline to treat over 400 patients and 98 per cent were cured within 4 to 14 days. In another study Chinese and Bangladeshi researchers trialled the same two drugs on mild to moderate Covid-19 patients .....In the Dominican Republic, the largest private health network treated 1,300 patients with ivermectin of which 99 per cent were cured and the average duration of infection was more than halved from 21 days to 10 days.

Since Wagstaff’s announcement, 33 clinical trials have commenced in Argentina, Egypt, Iraq, Italy, Israel, Mexico, Colombia, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Spain, India, Thailand, Brazil, Singapore, the US, but not a single one in Australia. Wagstaff has raised the money for a randomised, controlled, double blind trial — the gold standard of proof in medical research — from the Leona and Harry Helmsley Charitable Trust, in New York, but understaffed and overworked, she is still weeks to months away from being ready to start recruiting patients.

......ivermectin is on the WHO’s list of essential medicines yet there is a strange lack of any intellectual curiosity on the part of the pharma-government-academia industrial complex, editorialises Trial Site News, a digital media site dedicated to unbiased coverage of clinical research trials......

[said there has been talk] about developing Covid drugs and vaccines at warp speed but while its full steam ahead for patented vaccines, [no one] has not been able to blast through the roadblocks [for] off-patent drugs face. [Dr] Rajter said that just getting the results of his ground-breaking study published has been a battle [major pharmaceutical companies will lose a lot of money if ivermectin becomes the standard of care.]

Exacerbating the damage done by the cosy relationship between pharmaceutical companies, major academic medical centres and regulators, social media giants have become the self-appointed censors of this establishment elite. CEO Susan Wojcicki says YouTube takes down anything that is ‘medically unsubstantiated’ or goes against the recommendations of the WHO. Twitter and Facebook have followed suit. Videos made by doctors and scientists discussing the research on ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine have been taken town. Even videos on vitamin D — whose major source is sunshine — were censored. Yet Fiona Mitchell wrote in the Lancet that a growing body of evidence links Covid-19 mortality with vitamin D deficiency. Professor Rose Anne Kenny of Trinity College Dublin says public health bodies should be recommending the entire population take vitamin D supplements during the pandemic and it should be given to all aged care residents unless there is an extremely good reason not to do so.

When Wagstaff made her dramatic announcement on 3 April, only 28 Australians had died of Covid. Now, 232 have died. The vulnerability of older Australians is stark — only 9 of those who died were under 60. Worse, there are 1,435 active cases connected to aged care facilities. Without ivermectin, these people are in mortal danger. In NSW, almost 50 per cent of infected age care patients died.
 
Last edited:
Jul 2, 2020
234
27
130
Randomized Controlled Ivermectin Study Results Confirms PI Hypothesis: Drug Effective Against COVID-19

Aug 28, 2020 | Blog, COVID-19, Egypt, Ivermectin,

This study sought to determine if ivermectin could serve as a prophylactic for those individuals who had been exposed to someone in their household that was tested positive for COVID-19. To participate, the subject had to be between the ages of 16 and 70, healthy and confirm that a family member was infected with SARS-CoV-2, the virus behind COVID-19.

these findings have not been peer reviewed nor published. TrialSite offers a summary and hence no scientific conclusion can be made here. And as a reminder for those living in various jurisdictions, these study results, even if correct, aren’t necessarily relevant in other national jurisdictions.

The Zagazig University results reveal that out of 203 subjects in the ivermectin arm 15 contacts (7.4%) developed COVID-19 as compared to 59 (58.4%) in the non-intervention arm. Note, all of the subjects were symptomatic based on the study protocol, again here. According to the lead author, the difference between the ivermectin arm and the non-intervention arm was “highly significant” (p<0.001).

 
Jul 2, 2020
234
27
130
Jan 18, 2021
1
1
10
Randomized Controlled Ivermectin Study Results Confirms PI Hypothesis: Drug Effective Against COVID-19

Aug 28, 2020 | Blog, COVID-19, Egypt, Ivermectin,

This study sought to determine if ivermectin could serve as a prophylactic for those individuals who had been exposed to someone in their household that was tested positive for COVID-19. To participate, the subject had to be between the ages of 16 and 70, healthy and confirm that a family member was infected with SARS-CoV-2, the virus behind COVID-19.

these findings have not been peer reviewed nor published. TrialSite offers a summary and hence no scientific conclusion can be made here. And as a reminder for those living in various jurisdictions, these study results, even if correct, aren’t necessarily relevant in other national jurisdictions.

The Zagazig University results reveal that out of 203 subjects in the ivermectin arm 15 contacts (7.4%) developed COVID-19 as compared to 59 (58.4%) in the non-intervention arm. Note, all of the subjects were symptomatic based on the study protocol, again here. According to the lead author, the difference between the ivermectin arm and the non-intervention arm was “highly significant” (p<0.001).


The medicine can kill the novel Sars-CoV-2 coronavirus in just 48 hours.
Prof Tarek Alam, a doctor of internal medicine and respiratory diseases who leads the clinical trial program at Bangladesh Medical College (BMC), said: “Sixty coronavirus patients were tested. Taking doxycycline with a single dose of ivermectin reduced the patient's symptoms by 50% in just 3 days, and they were completely virus-free in 4 days.
“If we had applied for this medicine earlier, we would not have lost so many people in the country,” he added.
A similar study on Ivermectin was conducted by a research team of Monash University in Australia and also showed positive results.
 
  • Like
Reactions: adam
Jul 2, 2020
234
27
130
Ivermectin updates. Please review the data and seek applicable medical advice as required

The WHO asked Liverpool University Phd and his team to review Ivermectin effectiveness based on the existing studies. The conclusions were very favorable

The later video below reviews Ivermectin.

According to Drs using Ivermectin themselves and on patients randomized control trials have shown Ivermectin to be 80% effective in all stages of treating or stopping catching Covid-19 except at very late stage Covid-19. No treatment is to date effective against very late stage Covid-19

Ivermectin is taken weekly or every 2 weeks for up to 10 weeks or as a one off treatment when going to a high risk area. Doses of 12mg were mentioned. In some studies in India it was taken monthly.

The Drs set out that it can be taken with or after vaccination with no issues. One of the Drs makes clear he takes Ivermectin and has been vaccinated. He took Ivermectin after vaccination when travelling

Indications are Ivermectin remains in the body (fat or liver) for about 17 days after being taken

It is set out that the mass test use in various Indian cities eliminated Covid-19 totally.

One Belgian researcher has set out that widespread use of Ivermectin could eliminate Covid-19 in about 6 weeks

Given how Ivermectin works it is expected that Ivermectin would be effective against all variants of Covid-19

See video below for data links and info set out above

View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OY8QV7lnFFo


Ivermectin Trial Studies and info links below
 
Jul 2, 2020
234
27
130
Late Feb 2021 BIRD Panel - sweeping recommendations for the immediate global use of ivermectin.

Ivermectin Safety


A World Health Organization essential medicine since 2019, Ivermectin has been used for decades now to fight parasites. As noted above Merck has donated billions of doses of this medicine.

British Ivermectin Recommendation Development (BIRD) panel included dozens of multinational scientists and doctors discussing the mounting data points and evidence supporting the use of Ivermectin for COVID-19 cases. The large, diverse group reviewed the evidence associated with ivermectin to potentially prevent and treat COVID-19, with a goal of reaching a consensus and making recommendations for further investigation and/or use.

The group issued sweeping recommendations for the immediate global use of ivermectin. The findings are now in the hands of the World Health Organization (WHO).



WHO-sponsored review of ivermectin trials indicates 83% reduction in covid mortality. Dr Andrew Hill of the Department of Pharmacology at the University of Liverpool (UK) is currently performing a WHO-sponsored review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of ivermectin against covid.

In the following 12-minute video, Dr Hill is presenting his preliminary results, which indicate a highly significant 83% reduction in covid mortality (95% CI 65%-92%).

This result is based on in-hospital trials, so it does not yet take into account early ambulatory and prophylactic treatment. The authors of the review intend to include three more trials, due to be published sometime in January, before providing a final conclusion. At the end of his presentation, Dr Hill describes low-cost ivermectin as a potentially “transformative treatment” against covid.

Update January 20: The final analysis has been published as a preprint on Research Square. It found a 75% reduction in covid mortality and will be continually updated with future trial results.





Ivermectin Safety

A World Health Organization essential medicine since 2019, Ivermectin has been used for decades now to fight parasites. As noted above Merck has donated billions of doses of this medicine.

February 4 press release from Merck is raising yet more questions about why research money is not going to ivermectin and why this seemingly effective drug is so underutilized, even in North American research.

In the statement Merck, one of America’s great pharmaceutical companies and manufacturer of the Stromectol/Mectizan branded versions of ivermectin, claims that: 1) there is no evidence that ivermectin works for COVID-19, and 2) there is a “concerning lack of safety data in the majority of studies,” suggesting that the drug may be unsafe.

Concern two is odd, given that Merck has
proudly donated billions of doses of ivermectin to fight river blindness. On its website, Merck boasts that its own Dr. William Campbell first suggested the use of ivermectin for river blindness in the late 1970s and that from 1987 to today Merck has committed to donating, “as much as needed, for as long as needed” to eliminate river blindness. The firm notes that the ivermectin program, “reaches more than 300 million people in the affected areas annually, with more than 4 billion treatments donated since 1987.” And according to the August 2020 version of NIH’s COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines, ivermectin “has demonstrated an excellent safety profile” in past use. The Merck press release goes on to intricately detail ivermectin’s potential adverse reactions, but in the context of the NIH’s view and the efficacy issues touched on below, this focus has an element of strategic scaremongering.

Could it be because not only did they just announce their intention to acquire a company for $425 million to develop a novel COVID-19 treatment but they also recently received $356 million from the government to support the effort?


While most media platforms wouldn’t go near the ivermectin story for whatever reason, TrialSite objectively tracked study after study—why wouldn’t low cost, generic repurposed drugs also be considered along with novel approaches? Along with methodically tracking federal government-related grants and capital injections as Operation Warp Speed launched, TrialSite in parallel locked in on ivermectin studies—could efficacy be proven? Starting later in April through today, study results accumulated. With over three dozen clinical trials–from Bangladesh, Egypt, Iraq and India—physician/research groups emerged to conduct meta-analyses—that is a statistical analysis that combines the result of multiple clinical trials.

This class of research helps when there are multiple studies addressing the same question, noting that each individual underlying study reporting measurements certainly include some degree or error and potential for bias. The Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC), led by Drs. Paul E. Marik and Pierre Kory, was the first group to take on the growing number of ivermectin studies targeting COVID-19. The FLCCC meta-analysiswas followed by two comparable efforts in the United Kingdom—oneby Dr. Andrew Hill, affiliated with the University of Liverpool and the otherby Dr. Tess Lawrie with The evidence-based Medicine Consultancy Ltd. The Merck press release completely and utterly conflicts with these meta-analyses and over 50 studies conducted worldwide.

Ivermectin Safety

A World Health Organization essential medicine since 2019, Ivermectin has been used for decades now to fight parasites. As noted above Merck has donated billions of doses of this medicine. But how times have changed.

As shared by one of the world’s top experts in the ivermectin field, Dr. Carlos Chaccour, the drug is certainly safe, “When used for the current indications, at the currently approved doses, ivermectin is a very safe drug. To date, more than three billion treatments have been distributed in the context of the Mectizan Donation Program alone with an excellent safety profile. Most adverse reactions are mild, transitory and associated with parasite death rather than with the drug itself.” Dr. Chaccour, who recently completed an ivermectin and COVID-19 study producing modest results, was also featured on TrialSiteand most certainly has represented a voice of caution when it comes to ivermectin as applied to COVID-19.

 
Jul 2, 2020
234
27
130
Ivermectin has been proven in trials to stop 100% of high risk treated healthcare workers catching Covid-19 while 60% in the control group became infected. It is cheap safe

Other studies show ivermectin also cures 70-90% of infected patients within 48 hours




I wish there was a more open discussion about what is going on with Covid-19 treatments

See trial results and links below and in previous post

Here is one Ivermectin Healthworker TRIAL

1,195 health professionals were studied of which 407 received no treatment and 788 self-administered ivermectin oral drops and an iota-carrageenan nasal spray five times per day over a 14 day period.

The Results

The Argentinian study team reported around August 2020

1. ZERO Covid-19 cases recorded in the ivermectin arm,

2. 58% participants in the control group (e.g. not taking the study drug combination) were infected with COVID-19 during the duration of the trial.

The study’s primary endpoint in a 30 day time period was “Reduction in contagion” for health personnel.

Carrageenan is a food thicken agent



The deleting of posts by serious Drs talking about Covid-19 smacks of Semmelweis and is wrong


Dr. Ryan Cole is the CEO and Medical Director of Cole Diagnostics, one of the largest independent labs in the State of Idaho. Dr. Cole is a Mayo Clinic trained Board Certified Pathologist.

He has over seen 350,000 patients in his career, and has done over 100,000 Covid tests in the past year.

Dr Cole says he takes ivermectin and hospital studies show a 100% protection for staff taking ivermectin compared to a 50% infection rate in those not taking it

Additionally the patient Covid-19 Death rate decreased 70-90% in hospitals treating COVID-19 patients with ivermectin

He is Board Certified in anatomic and clinical pathology. He has expertise in immunology and virology and also has subspecialty expertise in skin pathology

He recently was invited to speak at the “Capitol Clarity” event in Idaho, apparently sponsored by the Lt. Governor’s office, where he discussed successful outpatient treatments for COVID, and to offer his views on the new COVID “vaccines.”

There is something very wrong going on

The CDC publically recorded 45 deaths in 2019 following 170 millon single flu shots -death occurring at a rate of 0.0000265 percent

As of Feb. 26, 47million COVID vaccinations had been given with 1,136 CDC deaths reported following vaccination, which is approximately a rate of .0024 percent (over a 2 month period - that should equal about 6,000 to 12,000 deaths a year)

Between Dec. 14 and Feb. 26, 25,072 adverse reports were made to the CDC VAERS system of immunizations with either the Moderna or Pfizer

Most deaths were occurring within 3 weeks of vaccination - 8% on the day of vaccination, 33% within 2 days and 52% within a week of vaccination.

It is believed VAERS may significantly under report vaccine deaths as it is a voluntary reporting system

See livescience link 3916 at end of this post - additionally note

Mar. 8, 2021 over 92 million doses of mRNA vaccines for COVID-19 have been injected, with 1,637 deaths occurring following the injections.

The 1,637 deaths reported by the CDC via VAERS following 92 million vaccinations are occurring at an approximate rate of .0018 percent.

Covid vaccines have 2 doses so the real mortality rate will be higher than 0.0018% as some will have had 2 shots (ie not 92 million people vaccinated) and assuming all post vaccination deaths are reported - if not then an even higher mortality will apply

It should be easy to report the death rates amongst non vaccinated - but this is not done

So lets look properly at using Ivermectin which is effective against all Covid variants

Dr. Cole describes ivermectin as a proven outpatient therapy and others that are being used successfully against COVID all over the world, and these therapies cost pennies compared to the costs of hospital treatments done in the United States that have been less than successful

He discusses his own use of ivermectin in the USA on patients (he is taking it himself) and studies / use around the world, including extensive use in Texan hospitals, of ivermectin to stop catching covid or curing patients with covid-19

View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=av1-f-r3tRg&feature=youtu.be



I would like clarification if it is true that under US law a vaccine is not supposed to be approved if there are already successful outpatient treatments. If this is the case does this explain the FDA not fast tracking studies on ivermectin and GS-44152

Dr Cole states that the highest risk factors for contracting COVID are advanced age, obesity, and low Vitamin D levels.
  • Inflammatory (cytokine) storm cannot be controlled without adequate vitamin D levels.
  • Massive numbers of Americans have low vitamin D levels.
  • 96% of ICU patients are vitamin D deficient
  • You cannot synthesize vitamin D from sunlight during fall and winter at 35-degrees north.
  • You are immune suppressed if you do not supplement with vitamin D during fall and winter.
  • Scandinavian countries (Finland, Norway, Sweden) test their citizens twice a year for vitamin D and fortify 35 foods with vitamin D
  • Darker skin pigmentation inhibits sunshine vitamin D synthesis in the skin.
  • Fauci says he personally takes 8000-9000 units of vitamin D per day but why has this has not become a public health message?
  • By law, the federal government cannot approve a vaccine if there is a proven treatment. That would be Ivermectin
  • The drug Remdesivir only works during the first 2-3 days of the infection. It does not increase survival.
  • Four billion doses of Ivermectin have safely taken Ivermectin. Death rate decreased 70-90% in hospitals treating COVID-19 patients.
  • Of the half million COVID-19 deaths in North America, there could be 375,000 less deaths if Ivermectin were used
  • Ivermectin works for all genetic variants.

He also explains that coronaviruses have historically always followed a 6-9 month life cycle. He gives previous examples such as SARS-1, MERS, etc.

One very interesting statistic that he pointed out is that in the U.S. the average annual age of death is 78.6 years old, and the average age of death during COVID has also been 78.6 years old.

Dr. Cole is very adamant that proper levels of Vitamin D are essential to fight coronaviruses.

Established World Data: “Normal Vitamin D levels decrease COVID system severity and risk for hospitalization by up to 90%.”

He also makes very insightful remarks about the development of the COVID vaccines and discusses that the NIH (the National Institute of Health), which is a U.S. government agency involved with approving drugs, holds patents on the Moderna experimental COVID “vaccine,” which is like asking the fox to guard the hen house.

There has been little disclosed about the vaccines adverse effects though some comments about reported vaccine death rates have come out indicating no issues.

You will have to make your own mind up.

See Reuters fact check link

Please remember VAERS is the CDCs public system on vaccines and there is a much better private system VSD the CDC uses

Monitoring of adverse vaccine reactions exists, and the CDC has 2 main reporting systems for vaccines – Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) and Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) and CDC said it would now add V-SAFE for Covid-19



What do VSD and V-SAFE show compared to VAERS?

View the post about VSD and VAERS in the link at




Comments on Death Rates

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) told The Epoch Times in an e-mail that as of Mar. 8, 2021 over 92 million doses of mRNA vaccines for COVID-19 have been injected, with 1,637 deaths occurring following the injections. The CDC claims the vaccines are safe, but a comparison between the rates of deaths following the vaccines for COVID and those for influenza raises questions

The Epoch Times hasn’t been able independently to confirm the CDC’s numbers. The publicly available Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) website shows 1,136 deaths through Feb. 26.

Details of these deaths are in a spreadsheet linked at the bottom of this article: symptoms before death, age, gender, time between injection and death, and so forth.
Between Dec. 14 and Feb. 26, 25,072 reports were made to the VAERS system of immunizations with either the Moderna or Pfizer/BioNTech mRNA vaccines (the only two vaccines given during the time period assessed).

The 1,136 deaths represent 4.5 percent of the total number of adverse events reports. Of those who died, 94, or 8.3 percent, died on the same day they got the shot. An additional 150 (13.2 percent) died the day after. Another 105 died two days after, and 68 died three days after.

A total of 587 (51.7 percent) died within a week, 215 died within 7 to 13 days, and 124 within 14 to 20 days. 85.8 percent of deaths occurred in people over 60.

There were five deaths among those aged 20–29; 10 in those aged 30–39; 23 in those aged 40–49; and 69 aged 50–59.


Comparison With Influenza Vaccines
Neither of the mRNA vaccines is FDA approved, rather, they have Emergency Use Approval (EUA). They represent a departure from traditional vaccines in that they do not use any part of the suspected pathogen to stimulate the immune system, but rather, nucleoside messenger RNA.
Dr. Christian Perrone, head of infectious disease at the Hôpital de Garches in France, stated in a complaint filed in Europe:
The first vaccines they are offering us are not vaccines. They are gene therapy products. They inject nucleic acids that will cause our own cells to produce elements of the virus.
The death rate following COVID mRNA vaccination is much higher than that following influenza vaccination. The CDC’s data allows only a ballpark estimation of the rate of deaths following flu vaccination. In the 2019-2020 influenza season the CDC reports that 51.8 percent of the U.S. population received a vaccine, which is approximately 170 million people.
VAERS reports that in the calendar year 2019 (not the 2019-2020 influenza season) there were 45 deaths following vaccination. To provide context, in 2018 VAERS reports 46 deaths, and in 2017 it reports 20 deaths. The 45 deaths in 2019 are occurring at a rate of 0.0000265 percent when calculated using the number of vaccines given in the 2019–2020 influenza season.
As of Feb. 26, 47,184,199 COVID vaccinations had been given with 1,136 deaths reported following vaccination, which is approximately a rate of .0024 percent. The 1,637 deaths reported by the CDC following 92 million vaccinations are occurring at an approximate rate of .0018 percent.

Because the mRNA vaccines each require two shots, the number of vaccinations given does not equate to the number of people vaccinated. If the 92 million vaccinations, for instance, represented each person receiving both shots, then there would be 46 million people who had been vaccinated. But it is impossible to say exactly how many people have received one shot or both shots.


 
Last edited:
Nov 12, 2020
160
31
130
Ivermectin for use in livestock and domestic pets is for that purpose ONLY. Manufacturers are now labeling their Ivermectin formulations as "Not For Human Consumption". N.B.: Self medication with Veterinary use Ivermectin is both foolhardy and potentially lethal. Talk with a health care provider for the safest protocol(s) for covid-19 prevention. As for the vaccines, they provide a varying degree of protection, just like the annual flu vaccine. Again talk with a health care provider.
 
Feb 10, 2020
74
10
555
Ivermectin for use in livestock and domestic pets is for that purpose ONLY. Manufacturers are now labeling their Ivermectin formulations as "Not For Human Consumption". N.B.: Self medication with Veterinary use Ivermectin is both foolhardy and potentially lethal. Talk with a health care provider for the safest protocol(s) for covid-19 prevention. As for the vaccines, they provide a varying degree of protection, just like the annual flu vaccine. Again talk with a health care provider.
I have a friend spending his 10th week in hospital after taking a shot.
I'd go Ivermectin all day long over any of these unapproved shots.. The lists of side effects and deaths are far exceeding the deaths. We see it country after country once they do the vax roll out.. Gibralter, Seychelles, Germany, UAE, Israel..
 
Sep 6, 2020
35
1
55
"They determined that the evidence on whether ivermectin reduces mortality, need for mechanical ventilation, need for hospital admission and time to clinical improvement in COVID-19 patients is of “very low certainty,” due to the small sizes and methodological limitations of available trial data, including small number of events. "

"
31 March 2021

The current evidence on the use of ivermectin to treat COVID-19 patients is inconclusive. Until more data is available, WHO recommends that the drug only be used within clinical trials."

 
Jul 2, 2020
234
27
130
There have been nearly 90 ivermectin studies to date 45+ peer reviewed, 52 with control groups and 27 with randomized control trials

98% of the 52 studies to date report positive effects (25 statistically significant in isolation)

The probability that an ineffective ivermectin treatment generated results as positive in the 52 studies to date is estimated to be 1 in 85 trillion

Random effects meta-analysis for early treatment and pooled effects shows an 81% reduction, RR 0.19 [0.09-0.39], and prophylactic use shows 85% improvement, RR 0.15 [0.09-0.25].

Mortality results show 76% lower mortality, RR 0.24 [0.14-0.42] for all treatment delays, and 84% lower, RR 0.16 [0.04-0.63] for early treatment.

See link later below

Ivermectin has been shown 100% effective in stopping hospital workers catching Covid-19 - in an initial clinical trial 58% of the control group caught covid while ZERO in the ivermectin group caught Covid.

See later below for link

There have been countless trials across the world in hospital and city population settings that show ivermectin is safe and effective against Covid-19

100% of the study of over 1200 Argentinean health care workers receiving ivermectin remained covid free over a 30 day time frame while 58% in the control group became infected

The study, formally titled “Usefulness of Topic Ivermectin and Carrageenan to Prevent Contagion of COVID Among Healthy People and Health Personnel” had a start date of June 1, 2020 and an estimated study completion date of August 10, 2020. The study team recruited 1,195 health professionals of which 407 received no treatment and 788 self-administered ivermectin oral drops and an iota-carrageenan nasal spray five times per day over a 14 day period.

The Results

The Argentinian study team reported that the study data revealed that of the participants in the control group (e.g. not taking the study drug combination) 58% of the participants were infected with COVID-19 during the duration of the trial. The study team reported no contagions were recorded in the ivermectin arm, showcasing the compounds’ virucidal effects can potentially protect against COVID-19.

The study’s primary endpoint in a 30 day time period was “Reduction in contagion” for health personnel.

The study team established that the aim would be to “reduce dramatically” and assuming these claims are factual the results are striking.

Out of 788 self-administered from the intervention arm, not one person fell ill to SARS-CoV-2.


Database of all ivermectin COVID-19 studies.
89 studies, 48 peer reviewed, 52 with results comparing treatment and control groups 27 with randomized control trials

98% of the 52 studies to date report positive effects (25 statistically significant in isolation). Random effects meta-analysis for early treatment and pooled effects shows an 81% reduction, RR 0.19 [0.09-0.39], and prophylactic use shows 85% improvement, RR 0.15 [0.09-0.25]. Mortality results show 76% lower mortality, RR 0.24 [0.14-0.42] for all treatment delays, and 84% lower, RR 0.16 [0.04-0.63] for early treatment.

• 96% of the 27 Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) report positive effects, with an estimated 64% improvement, RR 0.36 [0.24-0.52].

• The probability that an ineffective treatment generated results as positive as the 52 studies to date is estimated to be 1 in 85 trillion (p = 0.000000000000012).


TOO MANY COMMERCIAL CONFLICTS AGAINST IVERMECTIN

February 4 press releasefrom Merck is raising yet more questions about why research money is not going to ivermectin and why this seemingly effective drug is so underutilized, even in North American research. In the statement Merck, one of America’s great pharmaceutical companies and manufacturer of the Stromectol/Mectizan branded versions of ivermectin, claims that:

1) there is no evidence that ivermectin works for COVID-19, and
2) there is a “concerning lack of safety data in the majority of studies,” suggesting that the drug may be unsafe.

Concern two is odd, given that Merck has
proudly donated billions of doses of ivermectin to fight river blindness. On its website, Merck boasts that its own Dr. William Campbell first suggested the use of ivermectin for river blindness in the late 1970s and that from 1987 to today Merck has committed to donating, “as much as needed, for as long as needed” to eliminate river blindness.

The firm notes that the ivermectin program, “reaches more than 300 million people in the affected areas annually, with more than 4 billion treatments donated since 1987.”

And according to the August 2020
version of NIH’s COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines, ivermectin “has demonstrated an excellent safety profile” in past use.

The Merck press release goes on to intricately detail ivermectin’s potential adverse reactions, but in the context of the NIH’s view and the efficacy issues touched on below, this focus has an element of strategic scaremongering.

Could it be because not only did they just announce their intention to acquire a company for $425 million to develop a novel COVID-19 treatment but they also recently received $356 million from the government to support the effort?

 
Last edited:
Sep 6, 2020
35
1
55
There have been nearly 90 ivermectin studies to date 45+ peer reviewed, 52 with control groups and 27 with randomized control trials

98% of the 52 studies to date report positive effects (25 statistically significant in isolation)

The probability that an ineffective ivermectin treatment generated results as positive in the 52 studies to date is estimated to be 1 in 85 trillion
Your link is September 2020 whereas my link from an internationally accept source is March 2021.

It is a copy and paste without you reading the content or understanding as, and I quote from your link 'This study was observational, hence carries less weight of evidence as does the randomized controlled study '.
 
Jul 2, 2020
234
27
130

The WHO review you refer to is very limited and states

"The panel did not look at the use of ivermectin to prevent COVID-19, which is outside of scope of the current guidelines."

The hospital staff study I referred to focused on using ivermectin in preventing staff catching Covid-19 and was 100% successful in keeping hospital staff Covid free - 58% of the control group not taking ivermectin caught Covid-19

Previous research states Ivermectin is very safe even at 10 times FDA recommended doses with no material poisoning evidence being shown despite billions of doses being given

Ivermectin was generally well tolerated, with no indication of associated Central Nervous System toxicity for doses up to 10 times the highest FDA-approved dose of 200 microg/kg. All dose regimens had a mydriatic effect similar to placebo. Adverse experiences were similar between ivermectin and placebo and did not increase with dose.


Also please review my reply which centered around the link above to the data from the 90 or so ivermectin studies to the 30 April 2021. The data is continually updated and new studies added. Independent reviews continue to highlight ivermectin's effectiveness

The latest peer reviewed study was 19th April, with many other new study results posted over April

To show what the results indicate and how effective ivermectin is I quoted one simple credible hospital staff study example of these 90

which had a control group
was carried out out on hospital workers
and had a 100% success rate in stopping people catching Covid
while 58% in the control group caught Covid 19

The fact the study I quoted happened in September and there has been no material follow up with large scale human and animal trials despite many previous and continuing favorable hospital studies throughout the world including the USA, and the FDA changed the ivermectin status to allow its use as a Covid treatment is the real issue.

There have even been cases in USA where courts have ordered hospitals to allow the continued use of Ivermectin in patients who have dramatically improved in the ICU only after receiving Ivermectin and the hospitals then tried to withhold on going treatment for unclear reasons



I concluded with some of the FDA and Pharma evidence showing how safe Ivermectin is and the commercial and regulatory conflicts.

It is clear that ivermectin has been long established as having a dramatic effectiveness against Covid-19

From April 2020 or before leading university researchers in Australia and others elsewhere have shown Ivermectin as effective against Covid-19

That there have been no large scale funded trials of this WHO approved drug deemed very safe and of critical importance to human health is to say the least disappointing

Remdesivir had much less effectiveness compared to ivermectin but was FDA approved for use.

A video summary below helps outline the benefits indentified


[Dr Cole].... was invited to speak at the “Capitol Clarity” event in Idaho, apparently sponsored by the Lt. Governor’s office, where he discussed successful outpatient treatments for COVID.....

Dr. Cole describes ivermectin as a proven outpatient therapy and others that are being used successfully against COVID all over the world, and these therapies cost pennies compared to the costs of hospital treatments done in the United States that have been less than successful

He discusses his own use of ivermectin in the USA on patients (he is taking it himself) and studies / use around the world, including extensive use in Texan hospitals, of ivermectin to stop catching covid or curing patients with covid-19
Lets keep an open mind for multiple treatments alongside vaccination for this ongoing covid crisis and push for large scale clinical trials of ivermectin





It makes little sense that leading agencies have said that ivermectin is toxic in high doses never used or proposed in any treatments carried out when research shows ivermectin is safe even at 10 times the FDA approved dose

In Europe the EMA fails to dive deeper into the dozens of studies showing that perfectly safe doses are used with positive results.

And because EMA precluded a more open-minded, thorough and unbiased deep-dive review of those studies they therefore cannot recommend ivermectin for prevention or treatment of COVID-19 outside controlled clinical trials.

They argue well-designed, randomized studies are needed to draw conclusions as to whether the product is effective and safe in the prevention and treatment of COVID-19. [THE DRUG IS ALREADY PROVED AS VERY SAFE]

TrialSite shares that EMA does refer to a TrialSite article in relation to the Slovakia situation.

Call to Action: Given the recent news from FDA and EMA, TrialSite’s position is that both FDA and EMA are taking very narrow, industry-centric views shunning low cost, generic repurposed drugs while expressing more open and opportunistic interpretations for industry-centric products.

For example, while the pivotal WHO Solidarity trial shows remdesivir doesn’t help with COVID, this doesn’t stop FDA and EMA supporting the drug and the sponsor—this has led to over $3 billion in revenue in less than one year.

The pandemic reveals a clear and present bias in favor of high-priced, experimental drugs over generic, repurposed, low cost drugs.

Hence why Steve Kirsch put up the recent challenge to pay anyone $25,000 cash who can prove right now that Fluvoxamine doesn’t have all the evidence needed for authorization. TrialSite does share a new level of appreciation for National Institutes of Health for at least acknowledging key ivermectin studies and changing its rating to a neutral one.

 
Last edited:
Sep 6, 2020
35
1
55

The WHO review you refer to is very limited and states

"The panel did not look at the use of ivermectin to prevent COVID-19, which is outside of scope of the current guidelines."

The hospital staff study I referred to focused on using ivermectin in preventing staff catching Covid-19 and was 100% successful in keeping hospital staff Covid free - 58% of the control group not taking ivermectin caught Covid-19
The WHO do not conduct research, this is not their remit, they require peer review and correct procedure to be undertaken before they can make a position.

Your updated links fail this basic test to move forward.

I can easily find 5 people that claim chicken soup made them feel better from their illnesses, but without the correct procedure it is not going to be accepted - The procedure is noted by Dr Andrew Hill 'The authors of the review intend to include three more trials, due to be published sometime in January, before providing a final conclusion. At the end of his presentation, Dr Hill describes low-cost ivermectin as a potentially ' - We need to wait and that is another reason it is ot available as yet.

Your link on Trialsite is just an opportunist attack on the European countries... There is nothing stopping a roll out in many other countries, whom all are awaiting conclusive evidence.

ll you have presented is a host of early data and no accetable route.

Once that is in place then there may be a case.

At the moment all you doing is championing the risk of another thalidomide scenario.
 
Aug 15, 2020
34
1
55
Ivermectin is a very safe drug with no material record of causing human or animal death or illness. It should be urgently studied as a Covid-19 preventative treatment
 
Last edited:

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS