# Ivermectin the truth from a Consultant



## hollydolly (May 7, 2021)




----------



## chic (May 7, 2021)

hollydolly said:


>


I just watched that on youtube. He's so interesting.


----------



## Murrmurr (May 7, 2021)

He's correct that Ivermectin hasn't had an in-depth study. When one was requested by doctors who believed they had evidence that Ivermectin could not only reduce symptoms of covid-19, but actually prevented people from contracting it, they were denied the funds to perform an in-depth study. 

This doesn't negate the evidence they had, it only means that without huge donations of money and/or equipment and personnel, an in-depth, peer reviewed study won't happen. I think that's a sham...I mean shame.


----------



## hollydolly (May 8, 2021)

chic said:


> I just watched that on youtube. He's so interesting.


Yes I have him on my faves... he's an English Doctor working in several hospitals in the USA.. and with Indian Heritage so he gets to see the bigger picture


----------



## chic (May 8, 2021)

hollydolly said:


> Yes I have him on my faves... he's an English Doctor working in several hospitals in the USA.. and with Indian Heritage so he gets to see the bigger picture.


I subscribe to him on youtube. He's refreshing to listen to and makes a lot of sense.


----------



## StarSong (May 8, 2021)

hollydolly said:


> Yes I have him on my faves... he's an English Doctor working in several hospitals in the USA.. and with Indian Heritage so he gets to see the bigger picture


You've shared a number of his videos and I also have him saved as a favorite. He's quite credible and explains his points in layman's language.

In this particular video he stated, "Medicine and Science are in a constant state of flux and we're getting more data and learning more all the time. That's a reality of medicine and science." I thought that was beautifully said, and it speaks to the fog of war that Covid has brought. In ten years time we'll know a lot about Covid, but in the meantime we must treat it as best we can, even if some of that treatment is trail and error.


----------



## MarciKS (May 8, 2021)

They won't allow an in depth study on a medication that could keep us from getting it yet they pushed a vaccine through. This is why sometimes I get the feeling something sinister is afoot. But that's just me. I don't trust anyone. LOL!


----------



## hollydolly (May 8, 2021)

MarciKS said:


> They won't allow an in depth study on a medication that could keep us from getting it yet they pushed a vaccine through. This is why sometimes I get the feeling something sinister is afoot. But that's just me. I don't trust anyone. LOL!


Not just you Marci..believe me... !!


----------



## Becky1951 (May 8, 2021)

> "MarciKS said:
> They won't allow an in depth study on a medication that could keep us from getting it yet they pushed a vaccine through. This is why sometimes I get the feeling something sinister is afoot. But that's just me. I don't trust anyone. LOL!


Not just you Marci..believe me... !!"

Me 3!


----------



## JonDouglas (May 9, 2021)

I happened across this article in hospitalpharmacyeurope.com:
Ivermectin – time for action​A plan to eradicate SARS-CoV-2 in Belgium in six weeks using ivermectin was recently put forward by a Belgian virologist. As the number people testing positive grows and hospitals struggle to cope, this approach deserves serious consideration in other countries too​​In the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, there was much talk of drug repurposing and the search for suitable candidate drugs began. It was not long before the majority of research effort and money was being poured into existing antiviral drugs and a sprinkling of others.1 In more than 500 trials registered in the first six months, the majority focused on a small number of drugs including hydroxychloroquine, ritonavir, azithromycin, tocilizumab, lopinavir, chloroquine and ivermectin. By late 2020, there was a wave of published results from therapeutic trials of medicines reporting a lack of impact on mortality with use of remdesivir, hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir, interferon, convalescent plasma, tocilizumab,
and monoclonal antibody therapy. One year into the pandemic, the only drug with proven benefits was dexamethasone (for patients who were already hypoxaemic). One drug that had received relatively little attention until recently was ivermectin.​​- - - - - - - - - - [snip] - - - - - - - - - -​​So where does this leave us? Ivermectin is cheap, well tried-and-tested over the past 40 years and already available as a generic product in many countries. It is effective in preventing transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and also in treating the disease. The evidence for effectiveness of ivermectin continues to grow and deserves our attention and action. Failure to act swiftly on this evidence might begin to look like dereliction of moral responsibility.​​The full article is at the source.


----------



## Murrmurr (May 9, 2021)

JonDouglas said:


> I happened across this article in hospitalpharmacyeurope.com:
> ​Ivermectin – time for action​​A plan to eradicate SARS-CoV-2 in Belgium in six weeks using ivermectin was recently put forward by a Belgian virologist. As the number people testing positive grows and hospitals struggle to cope, this approach deserves serious consideration in other countries too​​In the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, there was much talk of drug repurposing and the search for suitable candidate drugs began. It was not long before the majority of research effort and money was being poured into existing antiviral drugs and a sprinkling of others.1 In more than 500 trials registered in the first six months, the majority focused on a small number of drugs including hydroxychloroquine, ritonavir, azithromycin, tocilizumab, lopinavir, chloroquine and ivermectin. By late 2020, there was a wave of published results from therapeutic trials of medicines reporting a lack of impact on mortality with use of remdesivir, hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir, interferon, convalescent plasma, tocilizumab,​and monoclonal antibody therapy. One year into the pandemic, the only drug with proven benefits was dexamethasone (for patients who were already hypoxaemic). One drug that had received relatively little attention until recently was ivermectin.​​- - - - - - - - - - [snip] - - - - - - - - - -​​So where does this leave us? Ivermectin is cheap, well tried-and-tested over the past 40 years and already available as a generic product in many countries. It is effective in preventing transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and also in treating the disease. The evidence for effectiveness of ivermectin continues to grow and deserves our attention and action. Failure to act swiftly on this evidence might begin to look like dereliction of moral responsibility.​​The full article is at the source.


"....it is hard to see how the estimates of effect size will be significantly improved by waiting for more studies. Several more randomised, controlled trials are due to report before the end of January 2021."

Wonder if those trials were reported, and if so I wonder if they were "ignored"?

Per the New York Times -
Last year, racing to develop a vaccine in record time, Pfizer made a big decision: Unlike several rival manufacturers, which vowed to forgo profits on their shots during the Covid-19 pandemic, Pfizer planned to profit on its vaccine.

On Tuesday, the company announced just how much money the shot is generating.

The vaccine brought in *$3.5 billion* in revenue* in the first three months of this year*..."

That article is here  https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/04/business/pfizer-covid-vaccine-profits.html


----------



## JonDouglas (May 9, 2021)

Murrmurr said:


> "....it is hard to see how the estimates of effect size will be significantly improved by waiting for more studies. Several more randomised, controlled trials are due to report before the end of January 2021."
> 
> Wonder if those trials were reported, and if so I wonder if they were "ignored"?
> 
> ...


For right or wrong, the words "cash cow" come to mind for all the obvious reasons, not the least of which is the idea of perpetual pandemic.


----------



## JonDouglas (May 21, 2021)

Perhaps some additional information on Ivermectin that I picked up. 

_Dr. Pierre Kory and his colleagues at the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC) are leading an effort to assess the effectiveness of ivermectin as a prophylactic against and treatment for COVID and to communicate to the public the mounting evidence of its efficacy.  (Ivermectin is well known as an anti-parasitic, and millions of doses are distributed annually in complete safety.)_​​_Kory recently published two important papers.  First is in the May–June issue of the peer-reviewed American Journal of Therapeutics, is "Review of the Emerging Evidence Demonstrating the Efficacy of Ivermectin in the Prophylaxis and Treatment of COVID-19." Its conclusions, backed by rigorous consideration of bountiful evidence, are as follows:_​​


> _Meta-analyses based on 18 randomized controlled treatment trials of ivermectin in COVID-19 have found large, statistically significant reductions in mortality, time to clinical recovery, and time to viral clearance. Furthermore, results from numerous controlled prophylaxis trials report significantly reduced risks of contracting COVID-19 with regular use of ivermectin. Finally, the many examples of ivermectin distribution campaigns leading to rapid population-wide decreases in morbidity and mortality indicate that an oral agent effective in all phases of COVID-19 has been identified._​


​_The second paper, posted on the FLCCC website on May 12 is "FLCCC Alliance Statement on the Irregular Actions of Public Health Agencies and the Widespread Disinformation Campaign Against Ivermectin." The subject of the paper is the refusal of most public health authorities, and particularly the WHO, to address honestly the evidence supporting the use of ivermectin. _​


----------



## Murrmurr (May 21, 2021)

JonDouglas said:


> Perhaps some additional information on Ivermectin that I picked up.
> 
> _Dr. Pierre Kory and his colleagues at the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC) are leading an effort to assess the effectiveness of ivermectin as a prophylactic against and treatment for COVID and to communicate to the public the mounting evidence of its efficacy.  (Ivermectin is well known as an anti-parasitic, and millions of doses are distributed annually in complete safety.)_​​_Kory recently published two important papers.  First is in the May–June issue of the peer-reviewed American Journal of Therapeutics, is "Review of the Emerging Evidence Demonstrating the Efficacy of Ivermectin in the Prophylaxis and Treatment of COVID-19." Its conclusions, backed by rigorous consideration of bountiful evidence, are as follows:_​​
> ​_The second paper, posted on the FLCCC website on May 12 is "FLCCC Alliance Statement on the Irregular Actions of Public Health Agencies and the Widespread Disinformation Campaign Against Ivermectin." The subject of the paper is the refusal of most public health authorities, and particularly the WHO, to address honestly the evidence supporting the use of ivermectin. _​
> ...


That second report is scathing.

I read an article that said some doctors were using ivermectin for treating covid19 patients, some of them ignoring a protocol advising them not to, and getting good and what they called "immediate" results. The ones reporting those results were admonished by WHO and NHS. I can't remember where these doctors were but I'm sure some were in SoAmerica and Africa, and I think maybe somewhere in the UK.

The FLCCC tried to get ivermectin in use primarily as a prophylactic; a preventive drug; and secondly as part of treatment. That pissed-off a lot of powerful people who were positioned to gain a lot more power with the release of a vaccine.


----------

