The NIH and ivermectin

I’ve had 9 patients die over the past two days secondary to Covid. The answer is to get vaccinated. It may not be the popular opinion but it’s the truth. Monoclonal antibodies, ivermectin, Remdesivir, or Baricitinib are not the answer. It makes no sense for people to die for something that’s largely preventable.
 
cures.png
 
I’ve had 9 patients die over the past two days secondary to Covid. The answer is to get vaccinated. It may not be the popular opinion but it’s the truth. Monoclonal antibodies, ivermectin, Remdesivir, or Baricitinib are not the answer. It makes no sense for people to die for something that’s largely preventable.
Did you actually watch either of those videos? Dr Robert Malone, the guy who INVENTED mRNA vaccine technology, says mass distribution of the vaccine is a big problem, principally because it is so leaky, putting environmental pressure on the virus to mutate.

If you are relying on NIH data, you are being misled by a corrupt, bought-and-paid-for group of assholes who are in the hip pocket of Gilead Pharmaceutical, the company that owns remdesivir. NIH said there were no studies which demonstrated the efficacy of ivermectin. That was a bald-faced lie. There are nearly 30 studies which indicate its efficacy against covid19. But NIH does recommend remdesivir, even though there are literally no studies which indicate efficacy against sars-cov2, plus a pretty good risk for renal damage.

95% of the people who have died from covid had an average of 4 comorbidities. Only 5% of all US covid deaths were people with no comorbidities - that's ~30K of the total of about 700K. How many die a year of flu and pneumonia? I don't recall the number of flu deaths off the top of my head, but a typical year sees about 20K Americans die of pneumonia.

People whose serum Vitamin D levels are > 50ng/mL have almost no incidence of covid, and no deaths that I can find, and I have looked.

Worldwide, most places where ivermectin is used for prophylaxis or therapy for helminths have lower covid infection rates, and much lower death rates. Places like central Africa, and Uddar Pradesh in southern India are two pretty good examples (population of the latter ~250 million, close enough to the US population that it's a pretty good comparison).

At some point, even the anecdotal evidence becomes overwhelming and cannot be ignored.

Yes, those who are elderly, morbidly obese, NIDD, CV disease or pulmonary disease, metabolic syndrome, plus a few others, those are the people who should take vaccines. Curiously, Vit D deficiency is nearly a universal with all of those groups.

Imagine telling a patient he had stage 1 oat cell cancer, but protocol was to wait until it reached stage 4 before treatment could start. We are literally doing the exact same thing with covid, just on a compressed time scale. Wait until the patient is at death's door to get treatment. This is bordering on criminal.
 
I wonder if that Fathead Neil Cavuto ever apologized to Trump or his watchers for screaming about the use of hydroxychloroquine?
He literally screamed "this stuff will kill you!!!!". I lost any respect I might have had for him that day and wont listen to him again.
Damn! Had that stuff too ! Between ivermectin and chloroquine I must be dead 5 times over. When I was young, chloroquine was still effective against malaria. And I have had plenty of it. Amazing I made it this far. Oh well- I am just gonna say I am 1 in a million. Wonder if my wife will believe that ???
 
The answer is to get vaccinated. It may not be the popular opinion but it’s the truth.

The "truth" is that each individual needs to evaluate the risk vs. reward for THEMSELVES based on their own personal health and safety considerations. Claiming that the vaccine is the one and only option we have to battle Covid is not only blatantly false, it's reckless and dangerous.

Monoclonal antibodies, ivermectin, Remdesivir, or Baricitinib are not the answer.

According to what research and data exactly?? You should expand your sources of information. There is now overwhelming, published, peer-reviewed data from both the USA and abroad on most of these drug therapies demonstrating different levels of success from moderately effective to extremely effective and safe in treating Covid patients.

You forgot to mention hydroxychloroquine in your list. Or did you leave it out intentionally after we have now learned that Fauci had actually been giving hydroxychloroquine to his friends and family at the same time he was publicly dismissing its effectiveness as mostly "anecdotal" and suggesting that doctors should lose their medical licenses if they prescribed it?

It makes no sense for people to die for something that’s largely preventable.

This is the only sentence in your post that I agree with, but I'm pretty certain that we have differing perspectives on how to this is achieved. Why would ANYONE be against any medication that could help prevent patients from contracting or recovering from Covid? Who the hell cares what the drug was originally designed for? There are scores, if not hundreds, of drugs that have been repurposed to successfully treat other illnesses than they were originally designed for. There is a reason the field of medicine is referred to as a "practice".

I honestly cannot comprehend how anyone claiming to be a scientist or physician would argue against using experimental therapies in a pandemic or any other medical emergency when the reward for the patient exceeds the risk? That is insanity by any other definition. Yet, that is exactly what is happening. Up until a few weeks ago before FDA approval, that's is exactly what we were doing with these vaccines is it not? Why then, is it acceptable to use experimental vaccines in a pandemic but not alternate drug therapies historically proven to be safe and cheap? These are all rhetorical questions by the way. We already know the answers.

If you truly cared about preventable deaths, I would think that you would be in favor of utilizing any and all available means to do so. The saddest and most outrageous part of this entire fiasco is the fact that we actually could have saved tens of thousands of lives if this disease had not been exploited for a political weapon from the beginning. Viable, effective treatments and therapies for Covid have been and continue to be falsely vilified and mocked by so-called "experts" and the MSM idiots with political agendas. These are the people who have real blood on their hands, and they should be ashamed of themselves. Actually, they should be charged with crimes, but of course that will never happen.
 
Sgt Zim
In the USA, most large animal vets, feed stores, Tractor Supply and such sell the Ivermectin Tube for horses and such animals. The strength is the same as for humans and the dose is weight dependent. More than a few farm folk have used that Ivermectin as a preventative and as a cure with good results.

Our local family doctor prescribes Ivermectin pills for her patients with the Covid Crap.
Just sayin.
 
Sgt Zim
In the USA, most large animal vets, feed stores, Tractor Supply and such sell the Ivermectin Tube for horses and such animals. The strength is the same as for humans and the dose is weight dependent. More than a few farm folk have used that Ivermectin as a preventative and as a cure with good results.

Our local family doctor prescribes Ivermectin pills for her patients with the Covid Crap.
Just sayin.
That's a solid fact. There's a TSC about 5 or 6 miles from here.

That whole bit of codswallop about all the people in OK ODing on ivermectin...took me about a half second to figure out it was yet another MSM whopper. Billions of doses administered, and I've never heard of anyone getting toxic on it. Like I said earlier, maybe there is a level that would be toxic for humans, but to my knowledge, nobody has ever crossed that threshold.
 
Ample evidence against ivermectin too: including interviews from educated people. You can find information to suppport whatever opinion you chose.
FC3F008D-6AA9-47C3-94CB-6D8A26CCEC69.jpeg
 
Not sure where I stand on ivermectin. I know the vaccine shots have been given to the tune of nearly 6 billion shots worldwide and the benefits outweigh the risk, in my opinion.

I did a Google search this morning on clinical studies involving ivermectin and there have been many. Most have been in poorer countries, looking for an existing drug to repurpose. A paper from some doctors in Japan summarized the data from most or all of the trials and came up with one significant finding and the conclusion that ivermectin works against COVID. The dosage level needs to be much higher and that is the concern with potential side effects.

The paper is quite long, but interesting.
 

Attachments

  • Global trends in clinical studies of ivermectin March 2021.pdf
    1 MB · Views: 64
Ample evidence against ivermectin too: including interviews from educated people. You can find information to suppport whatever opinion you chose.View attachment 425696
The FDA and NIH are compromised. There is no reason to rely on anything they say.

 
From the paper I posted in a prior post

6. Conclusion

The effective concentration of ivermectin against SARS-CoV-2 in an in vitro experiment72) by Caly et al. is as high as 2 μM; in clinical practice, it is necessary to administer tens of times the normal dose in order to obtain such a blood concentration. Therefore, there are opinions from the IDSA98) and others that the therapeutic effect of COVID-19 cannot be expected by the adminis- 82 ( 82 ) THE JAPANESE JOURNAL OF ANTIBIOTICS 74―1 Mar. 2021 tration of the normal dose of ivermectin. However, in actual medical practice, there are many study reports demonstrating that the administration of a normal dose does indeed show a clinical response. As of the 27th of February 2021, the results of 42 clinical studies worldwide have undergone meta-analysis and concluded101) that ivermectin is effective in the treatment and prevention of COVID-19. In the UK, a consensus-based recommendation by 75 healthcare professionals from 17 countries around the world has been carried out and submitted to the WHO to further encourage the issuance of guidelines for the use of ivermectin in the treatment and prevention of COVID-19. We must consider why such a discrepancy is occurring. The first consideration should be focused on the setting of the sensitivity of the SARSCoV-2 infection for experimental systems in vitro. By use of Vero/hSLAM cells, the antiviral activity of the test drug is reliably measured. The sensitivity setting is set to be as low as possible, because it is necessary to eliminate false-positive samples. If the sensitivity is set high, the number of test drugs (noise) that give a positive reaction increases. Furthermore, if the setting is high, it becomes necessary to set secondary and tertiary tests to exclude false-positive samples. It seems that the sensitivity of the IC50=2 μM set by Caly et al. was appropriate because neither false positives nor false negatives occurred. If the sensitivity of this test is set to 10 or 50 times higher, then changes in the IC50 (IC50=0.2 μM, IC50=0.04 μM, respectively) might be expected. Depending on the test cells, viral load, medium composition, and culture conditions, the experimental system in vitro can be set in different ways. Therefore, the paper by Caly et al. merely indicated that ivermectin was found to have anti-SARS-CoV-2 activity in vitro—no more, no less. Extrapolating the results to evaluate clinical effects is too much of a leap. There are in vivo infection experiments that can be used to connect in vitro experiments to clinical studies. In an in vivo infection experiment158) conducted at the Pasteur Institute in France, they employed the olfactory abnormality in hamsters as an index, along with dosage, in order to determine the equivalent dose that would be needed in humans. It was confirmed that the amount of SARS-CoV-2 virus did not change between groups administered ivermectin and the control. However, a significant decrease in the ratio of IL-6/IL-10 in the lung was observed in the ivermectin group. It has been suggested that ivermectin might be effective on COVID-19 by acting to regulate host inflammatory reactions. As shown in Fig. 1, ivermectin has a macrolide structure. Like other macrolide compounds, it is known to exhibit extremely wide diverse actions159). Regulation of the hostʼs inflammatory response is one of those diverse effects. In Japan, in 1994, ahead of the rest of the world, a “Research Group on Novel Action of Macrolides” was established. It was done for the purpose of clarifying actions160) other than the antibacterial activity of macrolide compounds, such as clarithromycin. The clinical use of several effective macrolide antibiotics for the management and treatment of patients with diffuse lung disease (previously designated as refractory diseases) was established. One such disease is diffuse panbronchiolitis (DPB). DPB causes an obstructive respiratory dysfunction similar to cystic fi- Mar. 2021 THE JAPANESE JOURNAL OF ANTIBIOTICS 74―1 83 ( 83 ) brosis (CF) (which occurs frequently in Westerners) and has been observed in Japan and East Asia. Although it is a fatal and intractable disease, the long-term administration of low-dose macrolides161) has made it possible to treat and reduced the mortality rate. In elucidating the mechanism of action of macrolides on DPB, novel actions such as chlorine ion channel regulation162) and anti-inflammatory actions163,164) were confirmed one after another. Following the elucidation of erythromycinʼs suppressive actions on the infiltration of macrophages into the endothelium, there were studies that investigated the prevention and treatment of diabetic nephropathy, as well as the treatment of active stage Crohnʼs disease. Several studies have also been conducted investigating the inhibitory effects of clarithromycin on the production of cytokines. One such study involves the suppression of excessive inflammatory reactions caused by influenza and other chronic otolaryngology diseases. Prior to this, effects such as these that go beyond the antibacterial activity of the macrolide antibiotics could never have been imagined. Additionally, for example, it has been found that erythromycin exhibits prokinetic effects for gastroparesis in diabetic patients. This was discovered to be due to the motilin-like action of a metabolite. A metabolite derivative165) (which exerted no antibacterial activity) was found to enhance motilin-like activity. By taking advantage of such derivative165) side effects, a new treatment for constipation in patients with severe diabetes was discovered. The biological reactions of macrolide compounds have been shown to be extremely diverse. Even though some have been elucidated, it is difficult to estimate how many other actions may have not yet been elucidated. Although clinical trial results have been and continue to be accumulated showing that ivermectin is effective in the treatment and prevention of COVID-19, basic in vitro findings that can reasonably explain its effectiveness have not yet been obtained. It is considered that a wide variety of biological activities exhibited by macrolide compounds, such as the above-mentioned actions, at multiple stages could possibly serve to exert an overall and more comprehensive action/ effect. Although it must be further elucidated by future studies, clinical efficacy can be determined by investigation of any of the following parameters: (1) antiviral activity, (2) inhibition of the relationship between the virus and the host cell, and (3) actions related to the regulation of host reactions. It is necessary to prove that other effects are being exerted, and it seems that such investigations could be suitable research topics for basic researchers, pharmacological researchers, and clinical researchers to collaborate and elucidate on.

When the effectiveness of ivermectin for the COVID-19 pandemic is confirmed with the cooperation of researchers around the world and its clinical use is achieved on a global scale, it could prove to be of great benefit to humanity. It may even turn out to be comparable to the benefits achieved from the discovery of penicillin—said to be one of the greatest discoveries of the twentieth century. Here, one more use for ivermectin, which has been described as “miracle” or “wonder”166) drug, is being added. History has demonstrated that the existence of such natural product-derived compounds with such diverse effects is exceedingly rare. 84 ( 84 ) THE JAPANESE JOURNAL OF ANTIBIOTICS 74―1 Mar. 2021 However, in order to pass on to posterity the fact that ivermectin has become widely used to control the world-shattering COVID-19 pandemic, only one simple action is required: the addition of only one word, “COVID-19”, to the 9th item (of the 11 listed) under the “Antiviral” category in the “Ivermectin: The Future” section of the Nobel Lectureʼs record167) entitled “Splendid Gift from the Earth”.
 
Not sure where I stand on ivermectin. I know the vaccine shots have been given to the tune of nearly 6 billion shots worldwide and the benefits outweigh the risk, in my opinion.

I did a Google search this morning on clinical studies involving ivermectin and there have been many. Most have been in poorer countries, looking for an existing drug to repurpose. A paper from some doctors in Japan summarized the data from most or all of the trials and came up with one significant finding and the conclusion that ivermectin works against COVID. The dosage level needs to be much higher and that is the concern with potential side effects.

The paper is quite long, but interesting.
No disrespect intended, but there is no way to do a CBA when we don't have any idea what the potential long term effects of the vaccine are - anybody who tells you we do know is lying. If you're in one of the high risk groups I indicated previously, getting the vaccine is probably a pretty good idea. For the rest of us, the vaccine will confer little, if any, benefit. Therefore, for those with no comorbidities, the vaccine represents almost pure risk and no upside.

Fewer than 5% of people who get covid will even need to go to the hospital (and fewer still will need to be vented/go to ICU). And even that number is probably too high because if you check in to have a hernia repair and you're positive for covid, you're counted as a covid patient, even if you're asymptomatic.

A good friend of mine, vaccinated, no comorbidities, has had to go to the hospital twice. He's back at home now, doing better. But to assert that the vaccine did any good, like kept him off a ventilator or even dying, is straight up post hoc logical fallacy.
 
I’ve had 9 patients die over the past two days secondary to Covid. The answer is to get vaccinated. It may not be the popular opinion but it’s the truth. Monoclonal antibodies, ivermectin, Remdesivir, or Baricitinib are not the answer. It makes no sense for people to die for something that’s largely preventable.
Sorry Drew but hospitalized patients are currently running 50/50 jab versus no jab. Check it out.
 
you are a fortunate man to have that guy as your doc.

This is where I have been able to be knowledgeable on this subject. He has interviewed all of the top experts on the subject and docs who have treated tens of thousands of patients on an outpatient basis.
Others get their info from FDA, NIH, CDC, and CNN. All liars!
I just want the truth and there is little truth in this world.
Regards,
Philip
 

Forum statistics

Threads
53,618
Messages
1,131,254
Members
92,673
Latest member
ChristyLak
 

 

 

Latest posts

Latest profile posts

Impact shots from the last hunt

Early morning Impala hunt, previous link was wrong video

Headshot on jackal this morning

Mature Eland Bull taken in Tanzania, at 100 yards, with 375 H&H, 300gr, Federal Premium Expanding bullet.

20231012_145809~2.jpg
 
Top