In regard to Ivermectin, you really need to read this: Ivermectin for COVID-19: real-time meta analysis of 63 studies. Very long, very detailed, but this was the bottom line.
“Ivermectin is an effective treatment for COVID-19.”
Anyone who says anything else is [you tell me].
First! Epic art, Dover. Lovin AppCat for that alone.
1988. Enya: Enya – Orinoco Flow (Official 4K Music Video) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTrk4X9ACtw
Neil Oliver: Evil, Evil Evil!
@ThrillaRilla369 Rand Paul: “The amount of money going to Ukraine in this Bill is more than we spend on the…
Will the Supreme Court Let This Crisis Go to Waste?
Orange man bad Mr. Kates. I think you’ll find these days that trumps all the facts.
Well, I could say it’s all about money. Money for the Pharmaceutical and “vaccine” makers. Putting into practice the diversified investments in media and technology companies to assure product promotion and sales. As well as creating a long term customer base out of the growing numbers of chronic diseases requiring long term/ lifelong treatment of the “vaccine” injured.
Probably more to do with a lot of money paid in bribes via offers that can’t be refused; the best money stand-over men have been making in years and getting value for money for those that paid to create control files to influence governments, regulatory bodies, academia and media. An example of the net result, the apparent propaganda stories presented by media to the effect of “young people seeking Pfizer vaccine at twice the rate of older Australians.”
What’s the bet these “new” medications such as that those twice a day pills the media has been announcing of late, were in development some time ago. Perhaps before or from around the time patents were filed for artificial gene sequences and technologies that found their way into the mRNA “vaccines”. Probably designed to mimic the molecular activities of Ivermectin and/or Hydroxychloroquin.
They will keep suppressing this until everyone possible is vaxxed. Only then is there a chance that they may admit it. Even that is unlikely.
Orange man bad Mr. Kates. I think you’ll find these days that trumps all the facts.
Honk…
#Puns
Given that some places are already talking about 2nd booster shots – ie four vaccinations in total, you have to think in principle that prophylactic ivermectin/zinc or similar would be significantly less dangerous, given the mode of action of the Pfizer, Moderna and AZ vaccines. The issue of autoimmune disease must rear its head if after any shot if the immune system decides to switch on against vascular cells.
Furthermore I suspect four is not the final number either, given that immunity seems to have declined to a low level in only 60 days in recent Israeli data.
I’d have less concern if the vaccines were regular killed-virus ones, or similar like Novavax is supposed to be, but multiple expressions of spike protein in various parts of the body is something not well understood, I suspect. There’re already problems for people with rheumatoid arthritis that we have seen quantified, and the heart inflammation issue is another seeming autoimmune reaction.
But I am not a medical scientist, so discuss it with your GP.
Bruce,
Pointless discussing it with your GP.
Now that the Premier is using coercion by threatening people who are not vaxed informed consent is out the window.
Roll on brave new world.
Ditto for me.
Am I reading it right that the author is “Twitter personality, Elgazzar, Carvallo”?
Authoritative.
It should be pointed out that both the Elgazzar and Carvallo studies have been exposed as error-riddled and wholly unreliable, making this meta study worthless.
Hi Monty
It is not ethical to be withholding a potentially
medicine while awaiting outcomes of yet another RCT.
The demonization of IVM is a clear pointer that government action on the scamdemic is not about health.
@m0nty
I am sure you noticed the hyperlinks for “Twitter personality, Elgazzar, Carvallo” link to the “Response” section following “Conclusions” where criticisms by the former and of the latter two are discussed by the meta analysis author(s).
As for who the actual authors are, the FAQ tab suggests people that would prefer some anonymity:
“Who is @CovidAnalysis? We are PhD researchers, scientists, people who hope to make a contribution, even if it is only very minor….”
No, you’re lying.
Good argument as always, Dot.
No one is willing to put their name to it because it is garbage.
What happened, Benito M0ntylini?
Is nobody reading Theoaded Dogma 2.0 any more?
Is that why you have come to try and squeak the Cathedral’s Narrative at us, like the good little Fascist shill that you are?
Orange Man Good, m0nty. Ivermectin Good. Stairman Dan Bad.
Now go away and sulk.
You’re an absolute idiot, monty.
61 out of 63 studies are still considered valid by politically motivated “debunkers”.
Incontrovertible truth.
monty is just calling it in as usual.
Piss off you fat little turd; and I say piss off instead of fuck off out of respect to the blog host.
I’m mystified why the Left (with m0nty clearly a representative member) are so down on ivermectin.
You think they would embrace it with gusto, especially since the core of the vax-reluctant demographic is actually lefty – such as PhD graduates and atheists. And with the retention of immunity from the current vaccines being only about 60 days you’d likewise think they’d be after something, anything, to protect themselves with.
But go figure. Once a doctrine is embraced by the green-progressive religion it becomes canon and anyone who steps outside even a little bit gets anathematized and figuratively burnt at stake.