Tag Archives: ivermectin

It’s A Little Late

Posted on by

On Thursday, The Epoch Times reported that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has now approved the use of Ivermectin for the treatment of Covid-19.

The article reports:

Doctors are free to prescribe ivermectin to treat COVID-19, a lawyer representing the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) said this week.

“FDA explicitly recognizes that doctors do have the authority to prescribe ivermectin to treat COVID,” Ashley Cheung Honold, a Department of Justice lawyer representing the FDA, said during oral arguments on Aug. 8 in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit.

The government is defending the FDA’s repeated exhortations to people to not take ivermectin for COVID-19, including a post that said “Stop it.”

The case was brought by three doctors who allege the FDA unlawfully interfered with their practice of medicine with the statements. A federal judge dismissed the case in 2022, prompting an appeal.

“The fundamental issue in this case is straightforward. After the FDA approves the human drug for sale, does it then have the authority to interfere with how that drug is used within the doctor-patient relationship? The answer is no,” Jared Kelson, representing the doctors, told the appeals court.

The FDA on Aug. 21, 2021, wrote on X, formerly known as Twitter: “You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Seriously, y’all. Stop it.” The post, which linked to an FDA page that says people shouldn’t use ivermectin to prevent or treat COVID-19, went viral.

In other statements, the FDA said that ivermectin “isn’t authorized or approved to treat COVID-19” and “Q: Should I take ivermectin to prevent or treat COVID-19? A: No.”

The article concludes:

Dr. Marik has noted that a number of studies support using ivermectin against COVID-19, as the FDA itself has acknowledged. Some other studies show little to no effect.

Federal law enables the FDA to provide information, such as reports of adverse reactions to drugs, but not medical advice, Mr. Kelson said.

“This is something the FDA has never been able to do. And it’s a bright line,” he told the court, adding later: “The clearest examples of where they have gone over the line are when they say things like, ‘You are not a horse, you are not a cow. Seriously, y’all. Stop it.’”

Judges indicated they agree that the FDA lacks the power to give medical advice; Judge Clement said, “You’re not authorized to give medical advice.”

But Ms. Honold said the government “isn’t conceding that in this case.”

She also argued that Congress has empowered the FDA to protect public health and make sure regulated products are safe and effective, giving it the “inherent authority to further its mission by communicating information to the public about safe uses of drugs.”

A ruling in favor of the doctors would prevent the FDA from reporting on consumers suffering after cooking chicken with NyQuil or that opioid addiction is a problem, she claimed.

Mr. Kelson said that wasn’t accurate. “It’s when they step beyond that [and] start telling people how they should or should not be using approved drugs,” he said.

Ms. Honold also said that the courts can’t hold agencies accountable when they provide false or misleading information: “The FDA is politically accountable, just like all other executive agencies.”

Check the statistics on Covid deaths in countries where people routinely take Ivermectin to prevent parasites. There are very few deaths in those countries.

Doctor of Death?

Posted on by

Author: R. Alan Harrop, Ph.D

In a recent article, I explained the reason blind reliance on so-called “experts” can not only be misleading but downright dangerous. Now that the China virus (Covid 19) pandemic has been declared to be over, it is time for an objective appraisal of how the pandemic was handled in this country. Since this may not be the only pandemic we have to face in our lifetimes, an assessment of what was done right and how we failed is critical to managing future pandemics successfully.

First of all, we have to commit ourselves to examining the truth ourselves and not rely on government agencies. Some facts are startling: the United States had one of the highest mortality rates as of October 2021 of 2,107 deaths per one million population; by comparison Germany had 1,126; Denmark 455; India 327; and Kenya 97. There must be a reason for these extreme variations. The purpose of this article is to suggest some possibilities and see where they lead. Remember one key fact, Dr. Anthony Fauci was the primary leader of our inadequate response to the pandemic.

Early on in the pandemic there was a denial from Fauci that the virus originated in the Wuhan lab in China. The evidence at time I am writing this article, is the direct opposite. Not only was he wrong but he had a vested interest in denying that the Wuhan lab was the source because the agency he ran had provided over $800,000 to that lab between 2014 and 2020; much of it in support of the absurd effort to alter a virus that did not affect humans into a deadly threat to mankind. I would deny it too!

Another decision he made was to oppose the use of two safe and potentially helpful medications namely Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin which could have been used as preventatives as was done in several other countries that experienced much lower fatality rates. Instead, he recommended quarantines, mask mandates, social distancing, and a shutdown of most of the economy in order to achieve what he called “herd immunity”. He stated that he was “science” and implied he should not be questioned which unfortunately most people went along with. He supported, (along with Bill Gates) the idea that the new, untested vaccine was the only hope to control the pandemic. Even going so far as to not only mandate the vaccine for older people, but for children who in reality had a very small to insignificant risk of serious complications from the virus. He also championed Remdesivir which could only be given in a hospital setting since it has to be administered intravenously. Subsequent studies have shown that this drug was ineffective. Fauci had a long history of working with the large drug companies by funding their research and advocating their drugs. The cost of a full course remdesivir was about $7,000; whereas hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin cost about $50 and could be administered on an outpatient basis. Follow the money!

It has been standard practice for years that physicians were able to prescribe medications for off-label diseases since the safety of the medication had been demonstrated. It was a decision between the doctor and patient. Fauci and other “experts” had this stopped for hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin. I had a personal experience with this. Early in the pandemic, I asked my personal physician for a prescription for ivermectin which he readily gave me. Three months later I went for a renewal and was told he was unable to do so based on federal policy. One can speculate that since President Trump advocated these two drugs whether Fauci and other members of the deep state were even more opposed. Who knows?

More to come in a future article.

 

Playing Word Games With Americans’ Health

Posted on by

On Saturday, The Epoch Times posted the following headline:

FDA Says Telling People Not to Take Ivermectin for COVID-19 Was Just a Recommendation

The article reports:

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) telling people to “stop” taking ivermectin for COVID-19 was informal and just a recommendation, government lawyers argued during a recent hearing.

“The cited statements were not directives. They were not mandatory. They were recommendations. They said what parties should do. They said, for example, why you should not take ivermectin to treat COVID-19. They did not say you may not do it, you must not do it. They did not say it’s prohibited or it’s unlawful. They also did not say that doctors may not prescribe ivermectin,” Isaac Belfer, one of the lawyers, told the court during the Nov. 1 hearing in federal court in Texas.

“They use informal language, that is true,” he also said, adding that, “it’s conversational but not mandatory.”

The hearing was held in a case brought by three doctors who say the FDA illegally interfered with their ability to prescribe medicine to their patients when it issued statements on ivermectin, an anti-parasitic that has shown positive results in some trials against COVID-19.

Ivermectin is approved by the FDA but not for COVID-19. Drugs are commonly used for non-approved purposes in the United States; the practice is known as off-label treatment.

This is a link to a CDC Health Advisory put out on August 26, 2021. I suspect that as this case moves forward, this Advisory may disappear, so I will quote some of it here:

Recommendations for the Public
• Be aware that currently, ivermectin has not been proven as a way to prevent or treat COVID–19.
• Do not swallow ivermectin products that should be used on skin (e.g., lotions and creams) or are
not meant for human use, such as veterinary ivermectin products.
• Seek immediate medical attention or call the poison control center hotline (1–800–222–1222) for advice if you have taken ivermectin or a product that contains ivermectin and are having
symptoms. Signs and symptoms include gastrointestinal effects (nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, and diarrhea), headache, blurred vision, dizziness, fast heart rate, and low blood pressure.
Other severe nervous system effects have been reported, including tremors, seizures, hallucinations, confusion, loss of coordination and balance, decreased alertness, and coma.
• Get vaccinated against COVID–19. COVID–19 vaccination is approved by FDA and is the safest and most effective way to prevent getting sick and protect against severe disease and death from SARS–CoV–2, the virus that causes COVID–19, including the Delta variant.
• Protect yourself and others from getting sick with COVID–19. In addition to vaccination, wear masks in indoor public places, practice staying at least six feet from other people who don’t live in your household, avoid crowds and poorly ventilated spaces, and wash your hands often or use hand sanitizer that has at least 60 percent alcohol.

The article at The Epoch Times concludes:

“The government engaged in a singularly effective campaign here to malign a common drug that has been used for a very long time and has been dispensed in billions of doses. It’s one of the most famously safe drugs in the history of human medicine. And when people did exactly what the FDA said to ‘Stop it. Stop it with the ivermectin,’ I don’t understand how that would not be traceable back to the FDA,” Kelson said.

U.S. District Judge Jeffrey Brown, a Trump appointee overseeing the case, said that he was most concerned about the social media statements because they did not include any qualifiers.

Belfer argued the statements were aimed at consumers and that the Twitter posts linked to one of the pages, which does include the qualifier.

“So it was predictable that if you include the link to the article, people will click on the link and will see the full article, which includes that disclaimer that if your doctor writes you a prescription, you should fill it exactly as prescribed,” he said.

“The plaintiffs, by their own admission, have continued to prescribe ivermectin. So they always had the authority. It may be that patients were not able to fill prescriptions, but the doctors themselves always had the authority,” he added later.

Brown said he appreciated the briefing from the parties and that he would rule “as quickly as we can for ya’ll.” As of Nov. 19, he has not issued a ruling.

The government did everything it could to prevent the use of Ivermectin. The problem with Ivermectin is that it is cheap and the pharmaceutical companies do not make a lot of money on it. The medical profession has sold its soul for money, and people around the world have did because of it. Accountability is in order.

Is Accountability Coming?

Posted on by

On September 30, Yahoo News posted the following headline:

The FDA Misled the Public About Ivermectin and Should Be Accountable in Court, Argues the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS)

Wow. I have no idea what the motive of the FDA was (although I could make some educated guesses), but people died because of their actions. They do need to be held accountable.

The article reports:

The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) filed its motion and amicus brief Thursday evening with the federal district court in Galveston urging it to allow the lawsuit to proceed against the FDA for its misleading statements against ivermectin. In Apter v. HHS, a group of physicians sued to hold the Food and Drug Administration, a federal agency within the Department of Health & Human Services (HHS), accountable for its interference with physicians’ ability to treat Covid-19.

“Defendant FDA has improperly exploited misunderstandings about the legality and prevalence of off-label uses of medication, in order to mislead courts, state medical boards, and the public into thinking there is anything improper about off-label prescribing,” AAPS writes in its amicus brief to the court. “Not only is off-label prescribing fully proper, legal, and commonplace, but it is also absolutely necessary in order to give effective care to patients.”

Yet the FDA published multiple statements and sent letters to influential organizations to falsely disparage ivermectin, implying that it was not approved for treating Covid-19. Many, including courts and state medical boards, were misled by the FDA into thinking that its lack of approval for this treatment meant that ivermectin should not be used to treat Covid-19.

“It has never been proper for the FDA to interfere with that essential part of the practice of medicine, and the FDA knows it,” AAPS informed the court. The FDA “insisted and continues to insist on interfering with the prescription of this safe medication by physicians in treating Covid-19,” AAPS added.

The article notes that AAPS General Counsel Andrew Schlafly stated that once the FDA approves a medication as safe, then physicians have full authority to prescribe it to treat any illness.

People died because of the actions of the FDA.

The Cure?

Posted on by

On Saturday, The Conservative Review posted an article about a peer-reviewed study on the effectiveness of Ivermectin in treating the Covid virus.

The article reports:

A new peer-reviewed study found that regular use of ivermectin reduced the risk of dying from COVID-19 by 92%.

The large study was conducted by Flávio A. Cadegiani, MD, MSc, PhD. Cadegiani is a board-certified endocrinologist with a master’s degree and doctorate degree in clinical endocrinology.

The peer-reviewed study was published on Wednesday by the online medical journal Cureus. The study was conducted on a strictly controlled population of 88,012 people from the city of Itajaí in Brazil.

Individuals who used ivermectin as prophylaxis or took the medication before being infected by COVID experienced significant reductions in death and hospitalization.

The article concludes:

The study defined regular users as those who used more than 30 tablets of ivermectin over five months. The dosage of ivermectin was determined by body weight, but “most of the population used between two and three tablets daily for two days, every 15 days.”

“Non-use of ivermectin was associated with a 12.5-fold increase in mortality rate and a seven-fold increased risk of dying from COVID-19 compared to the regular use of ivermectin,” the study read. “This dose-response efficacy reinforces the prophylactic effects of ivermectin against COVID-19.”

Cadegiani believes the study showed a “dose-response effect” – which means that increasing levels of ivermectin decreased the risk of hospitalization and death from COVID-19.

Cadegiani wrote on Twitter, “An observational study with the size and level of analysis as ours is hardly achieved and infeasible to be conducted as a randomised clinical trial. Conclusions are hard to be refuted. Data is data, regardless of your beliefs.”

It’s interesting to me that those in the study took the Ivermectin before they contracted Covid.

In December 2020, The National Library of Medicine posted a report about the low death rate from Covid in African countries where Ivermectin was being used to control Onchocerciasis.

The article reports:

Results: After controlling for different factors, including the Human Development Index (HDI), APOC (African Programme for Onchocerciasis Control) countries (vs. non-APOC), show 28% lower mortality (0.72; 95% CI: 0.67-0.78) and 8% lower rate of infection (0.92; 95% CI: 0.91-0.93) due to COVID-19.

Conclusions: The incidence in mortality rates and number of cases is significantly lower among the APOC countries compared to non-APOC countries. That a mass public health preventive campaign against COVID-19 may have taken place, inadvertently, in some African countries with massive community ivermectin use is an attractive hypothesis. Additional studies are needed to confirm it.

I strongly suspect that had the pharmaceutical companies not been involved, we might have looked for a cure rather than a vaccine.

 

When The Money Is More Important Than The Science

Posted on by

The Covid pandemic taught us a lot of things. One of the things I learned was to do my own research as much as possible. I also became more cynical about the relationship between pharmaceutical companies and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (currently headed by Dr. Fauci). As you may remember, early in the Covid pandemic, Dr. Fauci played down the effectiveness of Ivermectin in treating the virus and limited the availability of monoclonal antibodies in some states. Dr. Fauci’s preferred treatment of Covid was a drug called Paxlovid, developed by Pfizer.

On Wednesday, PJ Media reported that Dr. Fauci had tested positive for Covid and taken Paxlovid.

The article reports:

On June 15, Dr. Anthony Fauci announced that he had tested positive for COVID-19. It was a long time coming since nearly everyone around him in the White House has tested positive at least once. In fact, the number of high-profile people with repeated infections is rising — former White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, and Prince Charles, to name a few. Of course, what they all had in common was every single COVID jab available to them.

Fauci was no exception. When he provided an update on his condition during a conference call on June 23, he said, “I had one day of symptomatology. I started on Wednesday on Paxlovid. And I was on Paxlovid for five days. And I have now finished Paxlovid, and I am still feeling really quite fine.”

Then he gave the obligatory nod to the treatments he has advocated and even supported mandating for others. “I think I am an example, given my age, of what we’re all talking about today. I am vaccinated. I am doubly boosted. And I believe if that were not the case, I very likely would not be talking to you looking as well as I look, I think.” In reality, he has no way of knowing that, and there is no science to back it up. Still, seven days after a positive test, he appeared symptom-free and participated in a meeting.

Unfortunately Dr. Fauci suffered a rebound of Covid:

On June 28, in another interview, Fauci disclosed that he had a positive antigen test four days after finishing the course of Paxlovid. For the three days prior, his tests were negative. “So it was sort of what people are referring to as a Paxlovid rebound. Then over the next day or so, I started to feel really poorly. Much worse than in the first go around,” Fauci admitted. Then he shared he was back on Paxlovid since it worked so well the first time.

If Pavlovid had really worked all that well, he wouldn’t be sick and need it again.

The article notes:

Remember when President Trump took Regeneron MAs, walked off a helicopter, and returned to work two days later? Were there any news stories out of Florida about rebound infections, where infusion clinics dispensed MAs at high rates for weeks? At some point, there needs to be an inquiry about what happened to the MA program. It was the only FDA-EUA treatment that prevented severe illness in between 70% and 90% of high-risk patients through the delta wave. MAs were also effective at preventing COVID in people exposed to the virus. Paxlovid is not.

While no one should wish anything terrible on Dr. Fauci, it is important to remember how he loomed large in destroying the reputations and careers of doctors who advocated using existing drugs to treat viral replication, inflammation, and clotting. Some researchers and clinicians feel that restricting these treatments is a crime against humanity that caused thousands of unnecessary deaths.

Fauci also did not advocate for infusion centers and broad distribution of the effective MA treatment that was available last summer. Instead, we waited for a pill that doesn’t always work on the first pass, may be of no value to vaccinated Americans, and appears to be declining in efficacy because of how it works.

I am glad Dr. Fauci seems to be getting better, but what about the lies told to Americans during the pandemic? How safe is the vaccine? Does the vaccine actually work? Is the vaccine being given in America approved for other than emergency use? Why was Ivermectin trashed although it seemed to work? Why was the distribution of monoclonal antibodies limited when it was known to be an effective treatment? We will probably never know the answers to these questions because of the money behind the related decisions, but I hope the American people are now awake and realize that it is up to every individual to protect their own health–the government isn’t going to do it.

When The Government Interferes With Medical Treatment

Posted on by

On Monday, Townhall reported on a lawsuit filed by a group of doctors against the Food and Drug Administration.

The article reports:

In a lawsuit filed earlier this month, a group of doctors sued the Food and Drug Administration and Department of Health and Human Services for “unlawfully” interfering with their ability to practice medicine and prescribe ivermectin for use in Covid-19 patients.

Specifically, the three doctors—Robert L. Apter, Mary Talley Bowden and Paul E. Marik—argue the FDA can’t ban use of an approved human drug for “off-label” use. 

“The FDA also can not advise whether a patient should take an approved drug for a particular purpose. Those decisions fall within the scope of the doctor-patient relationship,” the complaint says. “Attempts by the FDA to influence or intervene in the doctor-patient relationship amount to interference with the practice of medicine, the regulation of which is — and always has been — reserved to states.”

The article concludes:

In a statement, Bowden said “fighting the system has been a much bigger challenge than fighting the disease.“

“Despite my excellent track record treating COVID patients, the FDA’s smear campaign against ivermectin continues to be a daily hurdle to overcome,” she said. “I am fighting back – the public needs to understand what the FDA has done is illegal, and I hope this suit will prevent them from continuing to interfere in the doctor-patient relationship.”

The government’s handling of the use of ivermectin in concerning. It was proven early on that if you administered ivermectin to Covid patients early, the results were positive. The fact that the government opposed the use of ivermectin is puzzling. Hopefully the disclosure portion of this lawsuit will shed some light on that.

When Medicine Became About Money

Posted on by

On April 29th, The Wall Street Journal reported that Pfizer’s Covid-19 pill has failed its latest test.

The article reports:

The Covid-19 pill from Pfizer Inc. failed to prevent symptomatic infections in adults who had been exposed to the pandemic virus, a late-stage study found.

Pfizer said Friday that the drug, named Paxlovid, failed the study’s main objective of meaningfully reducing the risk of confirmed and symptomatic Covid-19 infections in adults who were exposed to the virus by someone in their household.

Paxlovid was cleared for use in December by U.S. health regulators to treat people 12 years and older early in the course of their disease who are at high risk of developing severe Covid-19.

A website called uncoverdc.com reported the following:

Tennessee Governor Bill Lee signed a bill on Apr. 22, 2022, allowing Ivermectin to be dispensed without a prescription. The new law states, “a pharmacist, in good faith, may provide Ivermectin to a patient who is eighteen (18) years of age or older pursuant to a valid collaborative pharmacy practice agreement containing a non-patient-specific prescriptive order and standardized procedures developed and executed by one (1) or more authorized prescribers.” 

Introduced by Sen. Frank Niceley (R-Strawberry Plains) on Jan. 31, Senate Bill 2188 was co-sponsored by Sen. Rusty Crowe (R-Johnson City). The amended version of the bill signed by Gov. Lee will create a standard procedure for pharmacists to easily dispense Ivermectin to patients while protecting a pharmacist or doctor from being held liable for doing so. 

The article includes the following chart:

Ivermectin can cost up to $4 a day. As of April 2022, the cost of the Paxlovid  treatment costs $530. I think it’s time to take a really good look at big pharma and its relationship to the FDA and related organizations. American medicine has prioritized profit over patient treatment and that needs to change.

A Professional Stating The Obvious

Posted on by

Despite being part of the Trump administration, Dr. Ben Carson is not a political animal. He tends to speak his mind regardless of the political winds. On Thursday, The Epoch Times posted an article about his views on the coronavirus pandemic.

The article notes:

“We’ve been having tunnel vision” dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic, Dr. Ben Carson told EpochTV’s “American Thought Leaders” program.

“Let’s throw the politics out. We could solve this problem pretty quickly,” he stated in an interview that will premiere on Dec. 18 at 7 p.m. New York time.

…“Let’s look around the world at things that work. Let’s look at the fact that on the western coast of Africa, there’s almost no COVID. And let’s ask ourselves, why is that? And then you see, it’s because they take antimalarials, particularly hydroxychloroquine. Let’s study that. Let’s see what’s going on there.

“Let’s listen to these physician groups who’ve had incredible success with ivermectin. Let’s look at the results with monoclonal antibodies. Let’s look at all of these things. Let’s put them all in our armamentarium so that we don’t have a one-size-fits-all system.”

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) at one time had authorized hydroxychloroquine for treating certain COVID-19 patients but quickly revoked the emergency use authorization (EUA) in June 2020, claiming no data showed its effectiveness.

The FDA hasn’t approved or issued an EUA for ivermectin to treat COVID-19, citing the same reasons.

Using hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin to treat COVID-19 patients has been highly controversial. Some studies show, and some doctors claim, that hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin can effectively treat COVID-19 patients. A vaccine confidence insight report (pdf) from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) labeled such claims as misinformation or disinformation.

“COVID is a virus. Viruses mutate. That’s what they do. And they will continue to mutate,” Carson said.

Carson pointed out that fortunately, most of the time, viruses become a little weaker with each mutation.

The article concludes:

“We have a situation where you have the government advocating that children be vaccinated, even though the risk for death for a child with COVID is 0.025 percent, essentially the same as it is for seasonal flu. You don’t see us doing all this every year for seasonal flu,” Carson stated.

“The risk of mortality for a healthy child is approaching zero, and yet we’re saying do this without knowing what the long-term risks are?” he said. “And why would you subject an innocent child to a lifetime of unknown risk? It just makes absolutely no sense.

“We need to have faith in our government. We need to have faith in our health care systems. And by injecting politics into it, I think we have put ourselves behind the eight ball. It’s going to take a while to reestablish that trust,” he said.

“Why not learn how to look at what’s logical and what makes sense? And why not encourage discussion of those things, rather than everybody getting their respective corners and shooting hand grenades at each other?”

The way out is real leadership, he said.

“The only path is strong leadership. We don’t have that.”

As I have previously stated, “How many of our CDC officials and government officials own stock in pharmaceutical companies?”

This Infuriates Me

Posted on by

Yesterday The Conservative Treehouse posted an article revealing that between 100 to 200 congressional reps and/or staff and families who contracted COVID-19 were treated with the Front Line Ivermectin protocol.

The article includes the following screenshot:

The article reports:

This successful treatment is happening at the same time many congressional representatives are playing politics in favor of the vaccine; downplaying the effective anti-viral treatment and therapeutic approach with Ivermectin; and taking action to block regular American citizens from seeking similar treatment with Ivermectin.

Congress can seek treatment with a medication they simultaneously deny to others?  This is well beyond a “scandal”, and needs to be investigated quickly.

Additionally, as Merck has announced a new and similar anti-viral drug called Molnupiravir, two trial studies in India have requested to exit the trials.  Apparently the issue surrounds the new drug providing no benefit once a patient is moderately ill and hospitalized (READ MORE, Reuters Link).

The article includes the following video of Dr. John Campbell highlighting a comparison between Ivermectin and Molnupiravir :

It infuriates me that ordinary Americans were denied a life-saving treatment that was used successfully by the political elite. It may be time to un-elect everyone in our government and elect ordinary citizens to replace them.

As William F. Buckley once said:

I’d rather entrust the government of the United States to the first 400 people listed in the Boston telephone directory than to the faculty of Harvard University.

I think the first 400 people listed in the Boston telephone directory might have higher ethical standards than those we have currently entrusted with our government.

 

I Think We Have Our Priorities Wrong

Posted on by

The Gateway Pundit posted an article today with the following headline, “Custom Officials Seize Small Packages of Lifesaving Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine in Chicago While Record Amounts of Fentanyl Continue to Flow Across Southern Border” What? Has our government forgotten their obligation to protect Americans?

The article reports:

Customs and Border officials captured two small packages of Ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine at Chicago’s O’Hare Airport recently. The two drugs would not have raised an eyebrow before the COVID pandemic. But since the Democrats and media politicized the completely safe, inexpensive and effective medications the Customs agents are on the lookout for these cheap drugs.

The agents captured packages of 100 Ivermectin pills, 32 Ivermectin pills and 40 hydroxychloroquine pills.

The article quotes a Newsweek article:

The press release said that while officers were conducting an x-ray inspection of a package from China, “officers noticed some discrepancies.” The package stated that it contained “decorative beads,” CBP said.

After officers noticed the discrepancies within this package, they conducted a further investigation and discovered that instead of “decorative beads,” the package actually contained 100 tablets of Ivermectin…

…In addition to the package from China, CBP said that they intercepted another package arriving from Mexico that contained 32 more Ivermectin tablets and 40 Hydroxychloroquine pills.

Hydroxychloroquine was previously given emergency use authorization from the FDA for treatment against COVID-19 but on June, the agency repealed its authorization and warned against using it outside of a hospital setting.

I think certain branches of our government have their priorities out of order.

What We Are Not Being Told

Posted on by

CBN News posted an article today about an Israeli doctor who has been doing research on Ivermectin as a treatment for the coronavirus.

The article reports:

Professor Eli Schwartz is with the Sheba Medical Center in Israel, considered one of the world’s top hospitals. For decades, Prof. Schwartz has traveled the world fighting outbreaks like Dengue Fever and Ebola. He also began the Travel Medicine and Tropical Disease Institute at Sheba. At the beginning of the pandemic and months before any vaccine, Israel’s Defense Ministry assigned Schwartz to find a medical solution for COVID-19.

“Since Ivermectin is one of the drugs that we are using in daily life in the Tropical Institute, I knew it. I know the safety profile of it. And since there was some hints of in-vitro studies, which show the efficacy against specifically, even against COVID-19, we decided to go for it.”

That meant putting the drug through a clinical trial that lasted ten months.

“Our study, which was done here, it’s a randomized controlled trial, double-blind. It’s really, I would say, this is the best method that you are doing studies. And our conclusion is that it really has antiviral activities,” Shwartz told CBN News.

From his international experience in the field, Schwartz knew Ivermectin targeted parasites. Since its development in 1987, nearly 4 billion doses with few side effects and at low cost have protected millions of people from insidious parasitical diseases like River Blindness and Elephantiasis.

That success won its developers the Nobel Prize for medicine in 2015. Schwartz’s study made headlines in Israel when his trial showed Ivermectin to also be anti-viral.  

“This is the first drug to show antiviral activity. And then, I think, there’s a good reason to continue with a much more thorough investigation to see, for example, whether people who are at high risk, may not deteriorate to be hospitalized, to be mechanically ventilated, or to death.”

Schwartz’s clinical study found that by day four, 86% of his patients who took ivermectin recovered. By day six, 94% recovered.

“The bottom line is that … Ivermectin decreased faster the viral load, and also sterilized the culture much better compared to the placebo,” he said.

Schwartz explained to CBN News this means Ivermectin killed the virus and his patients were non-infectious. Schwartz says this could save lives and reduce quarantines by days.

“It’s a huge change in life. It’s a huge change for the patient. It’s a huge change for his family. And from the economical point of view, it’s a dramatic change. You know, it’s how much money you can save for the economy of the country, if you can shorten the isolation time,” he said.

But ivermectin is not accepted by the global health establishment. A major FDA concern is that a number of people have tried to self-medicate using a form of the drug intended for livestock.

“Don’t do it. There’s no evidence whatsoever that it works and it could potentially have toxicity, as you just mentioned, with people who have gone to poison control centers because they’ve taken the drug at a ridiculous dose and wind up getting sick,” said Dr. Anthony Fauci.

The World Health Organization advises “that Ivermectin only be used be used to treat COVID-19 within clinical trials.”

The doctor notes the problems with getting this drug into general use against the coronavirus:

The National Institutes of Health says, “Ivermectin is not approved by the FDA for the treatment of any viral infection” and that “well-conducted clinical trials are needed to provide more specific, evidence-based guidance on the role of ivermectin in the treatment of COVID-19.”

For studies to be accepted by the broader medical community, it must be peer-reviewed and published in a medical journal. That’s where Prof. Schwartz hit a roadblock.

Several journals turned him down, but one is currently reviewing his study.

“It’s something really very odd. I mean, in my career, I published, I think at least 300 papers and chapters, and I never heard the story that they have with Ivermectin. I think that this kind of international campaign, anti-Ivermectin; same that we have anti-vax, anti-vaccine, we have anti-Ivermectin. I don’t understand,” said Schwartz.

Schwartz added that while many health agencies want better studies, no large-scale trials on ivermectin happened until Oxford University began one in June of this year.

“I mean, it took them 18 months from the beginning of the pandemic to try to do it. I mean, people dying all over the world. And you have drug under your hand and you have to wait so long until you get any conduction of a good study,” he said.

Now, the pharmaceutical company Merck, which developed Ivermectin, and Pfizer are in a race to produce an oral anti-viral drug for COVID that some believe is what Ivermectin could do already.

We need the answer to some very basic questions regarding the coronavirus–

Who makes money if vaccines are mandatory?

Who makes money if new drugs are discovered rather than using traditional drugs?

Who gains if Americans continue to isolate and shop online?

Who gains if small businesses in America fail?

And finally, can anyone disprove to me that the way the coronavirus has been handled can be totally understood by the phrase ‘follow the money’?

There Is A Successful Treatment To Covid

Posted on by

On Wednesday, The Gateway Pundit reported that the 33 districts in Uttar Pradesh, India have now become free from COVID-19.

The article reports:

The recovery rate has increased up to 98.7% proving the effectiveness of IVERMECTIN as part of the “Uttar Pradesh Covid Control Model.” Of course, the media won’t mention that Ivermectin is being used for the treatment of COVID-19.

…Hindustan Times reported on this big development:

Overall, the state has a total of 199 active cases, while the positivity rate came down to less than 0.01 per cent. The recovery rate, meanwhile, has improved to 98.7 per cent. As per the state’s health bulletin, Uttar Pradesh reported only 11 new Covid-19 cases and zero deaths in the last 24 hours.

The article also notes:

Both Uttar Pradesh and Delhi have seen an incredible drop in COVID-19 cases because they use Ivermectin early and preventatively. Whereas Kerala, a tiny state located in southern India that is over-dependent on vaccines and less dependent on Ivermectin, has been reporting a significant increase in COVID-19 cases. Keep in mind that Uttar Pradesh has eight times larger population than Kerala.

Please follow the link above to read the entire article. It includes charts of what has happened in India in recent months. American doctors need to take notes.

Fake News From The Mainstream Media

Posted on by

Yesterday The Daily Wire posted an article about a recent article in Rolling Stone.

The Daily Wire reports:

A story circulating social media on Saturday — thanks to it being picked up by Rolling Stone and Rachel Maddow — claimed that hospitals in Oklahoma have been overwhelmed with people overdosing on horse dewormer, leaving gunshot victims in the lurch.

The story on its face was absurd, yet multiple media outlets pushed the claim, based on the word of a single doctor who gave an interview to KFOR. That doctor, Jason McElyea, claimed that the emergency rooms in Oklahoma “are so backed up that gunshot victims were having hard times getting to facilities where they can get definitive care and be treated.”

The first question that comes to mind is, “How many gunshot victims are we actually talking about?”

The article continues:

That, combined with an unrelated quote about hospital capacity, formed the basis of Rolling Stone’s article insisting people are ingesting Ivermectin — a drug that has approved uses for humans and animals — at such high rates they are overwhelming hospitals.

The only people who would believe that are journalists who learned Ivermectin is a popular horse dewormer and wanted to run with the narrative that people were taking that version of it to treat COVID-19.

The article concludes:

Stephanie Six, hospital administrator at NHS Sequoyah, told KXMX that the hospital had “not seen or had any patients in our ER or hospital with ivermectin overdose” nor did it have “any patients with complaints or issues related to ivermectin.”

She reiterated that McElyea hadn’t treated patients at the NHS Sequoyah emergency room in several months.

“I can’t speak for what he has witnessed at other facilities but this is not true for ours,” Six said. “We certainly have not turned any patients away due to an overload of ivermectin related cases. All patients who have come into our ER have been treated as appropriate.”

The story should have been viewed with skepticism from the beginning since fewer than 500 calls about Ivermectin have been made to poison control centers across the country.

It should cause all of us to pause a minute to wonder why some in the medical community (and the mainstream media) are so quick to condemn any possible cure for Covid that might be inexpensive and effective.

When Lying Kills People

Posted on by

On Wednesday The Epoch Times reported the following:

The Indian Bar Association has taken legal action against the World Health Organization’s (WHO) Chief Scientist Dr. Soumya Swaminathan for allegedly spreading disinformation on the use of ivermectin to treat COVID-19.

The association (IBA) served a legal notice (pdf) on Swaminathan on May 25, claiming that she was “spreading disinformation and misguiding the people of India, in order to fulfill her agenda” and sought to prevent her from “causing further damage.”

They further stated that Swaminathan, in her statements against the use of ivermectin, ignored research and clinical trials from two organizations—the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care (FLCCC) Alliance and the British Ivermectin Recommendation Development (BIRD)—who have presented solid data showing ivermectin prevents and treats COVID-19.

“Dr. Soumya Swaminathan has ignored these studies/reports and has deliberately suppressed the data regarding effectiveness of the drug Ivermectin, with an intent to dissuade the people of India from using Ivermectin,” the IBA said in a statement (pdf).

In a May 10 Twitter post that was deleted after Swaminathan received the notice, she wrote, “Safety and efficacy are important when using any drug for a new indication. WHO recommends against the use of ivermectin for COVID-19 except within clinical trials.”

On May 29, I posted an article about the impact of the use of Ivermectin in India. The article includes the following paragraph:

Marik was astonished. “If you were to say, tell me the characteristics of a perfect drug to treat COVID-19, what would you ask for?” he said. “I think you would ask firstly for something that’s safe, that’s cheap, that’s readily available, and has anti-viral and anti-inflammatory properties. People would say, “That’s ridiculous. There could not possibly be a drug that has all of those characteristics. That’s just unreasonable. But we do have such a drug. The drug is called Ivermectin.”

My question is, “Why are the WHO and those associated with it fighting so hard against a cure for the coronavirus and pushing so hard for universal vaccinations?” Is it about money or is there something more nefarious? The cost of this resistance to inexpensive drugs that have been successful in fighting the virus has been many lives that did not have to be lost. It is time that we hold those standing in the way of effective treatment for the coronavirus accountable.

 

Is There A Cure?

Posted on by

The American Thinker posted an article today about a change in the severity of the Covid-19 outbreak in India.

The article reports:

India has been suffering horrendously from COVID of late, and the complete death toll may never be known. But in the capital city of Delhi, mass distribution of ivermectin began and the results have been stunning.

The article includes the following graph of Covid cases in India:

The article notes:

In poorer countries, where vaccines are unavailable to too expensive for mass use, they have been forced to resort to ivermectin. This has had the effect of conducting a mass experiment (albeit not with the double-blind, randomized, controlled conditions that “gold standard” medical research requires. Maybe that will enable the ivermectin deniers to maintain their posture of self-righteousness.

Note that the emergency use authorization under which the experimental mRNA vaccines have been approved for mass use would not be given if there were an accepted effective alternative therapy. Billions of dollars flowing into the hands of vaccine makers would not have happened.

Meanwhile on May 1st, Mountain Home Magazine posted an article about ivermectin.

The article reports:

An earlier Australian study, reported in the journal Antiviral Research, showed that Ivermectin, which blocked other RNA viruses like Dengue virus, yellow fever virus, Zika virus, West Nile virus, influenza, the Avian flu, and HIV1/AIDS in vitro, decimated the coronavirus in vitro, wiping out “essentially all viral material by 48 hours.” But more research was needed in human beings.

But by October Marik’s concerns were answered. The studies were well-designed university trials that showed amazing anti-COVID-19 activity at the normal doses used to treat parasites. Though small and endlessly diverse by large, Western big pharma “one-size-fits all” random control trials, the Ivermectin studies were a mosaic of hundreds of scientists and many thousands of patients in trials all over the world, all showing the same remarkable efficacy against all phases of COVID-19 no matter what dose or age or severity of the patient. “Penicillin never was randomized,” Marik says. “It just obviously worked. Ivermectin obviously works.”

Marik was astonished. “If you were to say, tell me the characteristics of a perfect drug to treat COVID-19, what would you ask for?” he said. “I think you would ask firstly for something that’s safe, that’s cheap, that’s readily available, and has anti-viral and anti-inflammatory properties. People would say, “That’s ridiculous. There could not possibly be a drug that has all of those characteristics. That’s just unreasonable. But we do have such a drug. The drug is called Ivermectin.”

If it was universally distributed at a dose that costs ten American cents in India and about the cost of a Big Mac in the United States, he said, Ivermectin would save countless lives, crush variants, eliminate the need for endless big pharma booster shots, and end the pandemic all over the world.

There were no effective, lifesaving, approved COVID-19 treatments that doctors had used to slow down or stop the coronavirus in the history of the pandemic, in any phase of the disease, except the one, corticosteroids, that Marik and company had discovered.

Now they had discovered another treatment, even more powerful, that could save the world.

Please follow the link to read the entire article in Mountain Home Magazine. It details the legal hoops a family had to go through to get the ivermectin treatment for their mother that saved her life. At some point we are going to have to look at whether or not there is a financial aspect of pushing the coronavirus vaccine rather than focusing on the treatment of the virus. I truly believe people have died due to conflicting financial interests.