The Indian province of Uttar Pradesh has completely rid itself of covid by treating its population of 240 million with ivermectin which costs around one dollar per treatment.
The Indian province of Uttar Pradesh has completely rid itself of covid by treating its population of 240 million with ivermectin which costs around one dollar per treatment.
Not just uttar pradesh, india generally. A few holdout states are following US procesure and are fetting plowed by covid. the indian version of the bar association is suing the indian woman who is head of, uh, who? for her demonstrably false statements on ivermectin and formally recommended criminal charges to the national government.
Also, if they were to use an old drug, they would lose their emergency use status for rushing through their new drug, which costs a bundle. Get it? Drug companies do this more times than not--a drug is off patent, so they screw around with it a little, call it new, get a new patent and charge $1000 a pill for it. Seriously, they do this 80% of the time, and usually the new drug is no better than the old one. Read any book about the pharma industry.
This actually is a new antiviral, developed not by Merck but by a small biolab that was ignored for months while Pfizer, Moderna, et al. swallowed billions of "taxpayer" money insisting it was get vaccinated or die with the help of the feds and the media. Now it's finally registering there are actually people who won't be terrified into doing something they prefer not to do, the antiviral is announced then immediately condemned because its price was inflated by 4000% as the feds write the check to buy up a slew of it for $714 for a five-day treatment regimen. Oh, and Pfizer is now releasing information about the effectiveness of natural immunity, which you may recall it was not long ago insisting wasn't sufficient and would require at least two shots of a vaccine that will (surprise!) likely need a booster every 6-8 months because it's really just a preventative not an actual vaccine. ЁЯЩД
I used herbal healing when Covid came knocking on our door. When the pandemic first revved up I dreamed about this cure. It worked beautifully along with prayer and priesthood blessings.
The only "cure" for a SARS virus is the human immune system. Which pollution and our pharma-dependent culture have weakened and in some cases totally crippled in large numbers of people. However, in the early reports of how the infection acted on the body, a major factor was that the immune-system reaction tended to result in widespread severe inflammation. Yet not once did I see ANYONE suggest that those who were exposed or diagnosed use natural anti-inflammatories like green tea as a possible means of mitigating this reaction. And now we see that same absence as the Moderna vaccine is shown to cause myocarditis in some young people. In other words, the narrative isn't geared toward mitigating the virus; it's all about letting people get sick then providing expensive treatments once the infection gets serious.
I've taken green tea extract for 30 years and pine bark extract for the last 15. Maybe that's why my case was so mild. The green tea is mostly for its antioxidant properties and the pine bark positively impacts tinnitus for me.
Not really, no. Ivermectin is almost 3 times the molecular weight of Molnupiravir; it's actually a fairly large molecule. They don't look anything alike either, molnupiravir looks like it is probably derived from modifying a sugar like glucose.
We read books by doctors who are whistleblowers about the drug industry. We also read studies on PubMed. You should take a break from trolling and try it sometime.
I read it, at least the abstract. The review study is one down, under "comment on." It is strongly positive for the effectiveness of ivermectin - and it's posted on the NIH!
Whew. You're very demanding. Full disclosure: I'm an educated layman, like most of us. So I judge studies by the reputation of the authors and by how careful or thorough they appear to have been.
Better link: https://journals.lww.com/americantherapeutics/fulltext/2021/08000/ivermectin_for_prevention_and_treatment_of.7.aspx; shows the authors, and it's in a peer-reviewed journal. It's based on 64 smaller studies, and shows very high effectiveness for ivermectin - "Conclusion: Moderate-certainty evidence finds that large reductions in COVID-19 deaths are possible using ivermectin. Using ivermectin early in the clinical course may reduce numbers progressing to severe disease. The apparent safety and low cost suggest that ivermectin is likely to have a significant impact on the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic globally." Findings: "Meta-analysis of 15 trials, assessing 2438 participants, found that ivermectin reduced the risk of death by an average of 62% (95% CI 27%тАУ81%)" - considerably better than Molnupravir (sic). There's a lot more; it's a long paper, with immense detail. Dr. Theresa Lawrie, one of the lead authors, does exactly this sort of thing for the WHO. Maybe they didn't listen to her this time. I wonder why?
About "review" articles in general: they're valuable when no large CRT study has been done. Those are very expensive and take a long time, so they're at the mercy of those who dispense that kind of money. By combining many small studies, this one had over 2,000 subjects, and the multiplicity is a safeguard against bias, if they mostly agree, which they do in this case.
On the other hand, review articles usually make judgements about which studies to include; that makes for potential bias. This paper goes into that at length. Normally, it's probably not an issue, but it's more of a concern when the subject is highly controversial.
However, this study appears to have been done very carefully by highly qualified people.
Your strategy isnтАЩt working. You just look like youтАЩre spamming random replies that have no connection to the comments youтАЩre replying to.
I donтАЩt know if you think this is clever, but the total absence of anyone liking anything you write should tell you that no one is fooled by it. Have you considered just stopping?
You don't seem to realize that posting is his life; there can be no other rational explanation for why he could find the time to post non factual nonsense so many times. In between these posts, his most likely activity is sticking his hand in a pitcher of beer, trying to get his date drunk.
What I don't understand is why Linda Hagge, who is the rational and factual one, wastes so much of her time responding to him.
Except ivermectin doesnтАЩt cure or prevent Covid so what you're saying makes no sense. UP beat Covid with an extensive vaccination and track and test program. Same thing the WHO recommends. And fwiw Merck manufacturers ivermectin. I guess theyтАЩre conspiring against themselves.
They still do make money from it, but since anyone can make it now, that money is declining. If they promoted it, they would lose their emergency use status for their new, more expensive drug that they are bringing out much too fast.
120 drug trials say you're wrong. You haven't read the actual science--you've just believed a media shill, a media that depends on pharma for 80% of its funding. Check PubMed for yourself and look at meta-analyses.
That article is a couple weeks old and says there are 18M people fully vaccinated (~10%). The 100M is the total doses, which matches roughly the other trackers I can find. So comparatively less vaccinated than America, no matter how you cut it.
Some of the people distributing Ivermectin in Uttar Pradesh work for the WHO. Similarly, on the FDA's own official Youtube channel they host the video from this past September's vaccine and booster review where they discuss Ivermectin's success in India:
^ the part I am referring to is somewhere about 4 hours and 5 to 20 minutes in, you can just adjust the scroll a little before there and skip to it if you would like to check. These are the FDA's own approved panel of experts reviewing the vaccine results this year sometime around September 12th-14th.
But the point of fact is: behind closed doors and out of the media eye, a number of the big experts both at the FDA and WHO think there is definitely something positive to Ivermectin in regards to combating Covid, to the point where the WHO themselves is delivering it to some places with low vaccination rates like Uttar Pradesh. Similarly just a month or so ago the two leading biologics (includes vaccines) heads at the FDA resigned because they thought the vaccines are being pushed by the CDC, the media, and Biden administration harder than the existing data warranted at this time and didn't want their multi-decade reputations associated with what could be the fallout. Apparently the former heads of vaccines at the FDA are "anti-vaxers" if the standard rubric is to be believed. These *ARE* the experts we are supposed to listen to, don't *YOU* believe the science?
The only reason the moon landing hoax wasn't a hoax was that the Soviets confirmed what we were saying, with no good reason to do so except it was the truth. So modern people who weren't alive in 1969-72 were justified in at least questioning it.
You're repeating Big Pharma propaganda. Here's a major review study that finds the opposite,credit John Hohn up above, listed on the NIH: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34469921/
As I said up there, we're all being gaslit by the industry and, to their eternal shame, the Democrats.
Do you honestly believe that the commenters here are so stupid that they cannot see through your psychologically dishonest, manipulative bs? Lol, youтАЩre giving all of us a pretty good laugh with your insipidity and inanity. Keep going! At least itтАЩs somewhat tepidly amusing on the amuso-meter.
The Indian province of Uttar Pradesh has completely rid itself of covid by treating its population of 240 million with ivermectin which costs around one dollar per treatment.
Not just uttar pradesh, india generally. A few holdout states are following US procesure and are fetting plowed by covid. the indian version of the bar association is suing the indian woman who is head of, uh, who? for her demonstrably false statements on ivermectin and formally recommended criminal charges to the national government.
Hope they throw the book at her, demonstrate how an actual concerned government deals with bad actors.
Did you really work for the Agency because I have one up on youтАж
No, but I still work for the Army in a way, shape or form.
I do have friends who do agency type work.
I lived there for 3 years and this smells of truthfulness.
Based on past performance, better chance of being right than the Establishment news. C'mon, you know it's true.
It might be exaggerated, but I've seen the same claim in multiple sources. The Indian bar association suing made the news - Yahoo, if memory serves.
But if Americans do not take the Merck drug, how will all those cute drug reps pay off their student loans?
You raise an important issue. Cute drug reps are a national asset.
Merck created and manufactures ivermectin.
Also, if they were to use an old drug, they would lose their emergency use status for rushing through their new drug, which costs a bundle. Get it? Drug companies do this more times than not--a drug is off patent, so they screw around with it a little, call it new, get a new patent and charge $1000 a pill for it. Seriously, they do this 80% of the time, and usually the new drug is no better than the old one. Read any book about the pharma industry.
This actually is a new antiviral, developed not by Merck but by a small biolab that was ignored for months while Pfizer, Moderna, et al. swallowed billions of "taxpayer" money insisting it was get vaccinated or die with the help of the feds and the media. Now it's finally registering there are actually people who won't be terrified into doing something they prefer not to do, the antiviral is announced then immediately condemned because its price was inflated by 4000% as the feds write the check to buy up a slew of it for $714 for a five-day treatment regimen. Oh, and Pfizer is now releasing information about the effectiveness of natural immunity, which you may recall it was not long ago insisting wasn't sufficient and would require at least two shots of a vaccine that will (surprise!) likely need a booster every 6-8 months because it's really just a preventative not an actual vaccine. ЁЯЩД
Thank you, Liz. You go on my list of clear-headed people not totally submerged in tribal hoohah. Good for you.
"If you can keep your head when all about you
Are losing theirs and blaming it on you,
If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you,
But make allowance for their doubting too;"
My cardiologist told me about drug tweaking in order to maintain patent and retain high profits.
I used herbal healing when Covid came knocking on our door. When the pandemic first revved up I dreamed about this cure. It worked beautifully along with prayer and priesthood blessings.
https://jennyhatch.com/2020/03/28/the-cure-for-coronavirus-from-a-master-herbalist-jennyhatch/
The only "cure" for a SARS virus is the human immune system. Which pollution and our pharma-dependent culture have weakened and in some cases totally crippled in large numbers of people. However, in the early reports of how the infection acted on the body, a major factor was that the immune-system reaction tended to result in widespread severe inflammation. Yet not once did I see ANYONE suggest that those who were exposed or diagnosed use natural anti-inflammatories like green tea as a possible means of mitigating this reaction. And now we see that same absence as the Moderna vaccine is shown to cause myocarditis in some young people. In other words, the narrative isn't geared toward mitigating the virus; it's all about letting people get sick then providing expensive treatments once the infection gets serious.
I've taken green tea extract for 30 years and pine bark extract for the last 15. Maybe that's why my case was so mild. The green tea is mostly for its antioxidant properties and the pine bark positively impacts tinnitus for me.
Ivermectin is off patent and manufactured by generic drug manufacturers around the world.
And the drug has been utterly disparaged. Time for a new drug, Ivermectin, reformulated with a new name.
bingo - monospirvir
Im sure the new drug contains the same stuff as ivermectin
Not really, no. Ivermectin is almost 3 times the molecular weight of Molnupiravir; it's actually a fairly large molecule. They don't look anything alike either, molnupiravir looks like it is probably derived from modifying a sugar like glucose.
No, we read books.
We read books by doctors who are whistleblowers about the drug industry. We also read studies on PubMed. You should take a break from trolling and try it sometime.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34469921/
I read it, at least the abstract. The review study is one down, under "comment on." It is strongly positive for the effectiveness of ivermectin - and it's posted on the NIH!
I think we've all been gaslit.
Whew. You're very demanding. Full disclosure: I'm an educated layman, like most of us. So I judge studies by the reputation of the authors and by how careful or thorough they appear to have been.
Better link: https://journals.lww.com/americantherapeutics/fulltext/2021/08000/ivermectin_for_prevention_and_treatment_of.7.aspx; shows the authors, and it's in a peer-reviewed journal. It's based on 64 smaller studies, and shows very high effectiveness for ivermectin - "Conclusion: Moderate-certainty evidence finds that large reductions in COVID-19 deaths are possible using ivermectin. Using ivermectin early in the clinical course may reduce numbers progressing to severe disease. The apparent safety and low cost suggest that ivermectin is likely to have a significant impact on the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic globally." Findings: "Meta-analysis of 15 trials, assessing 2438 participants, found that ivermectin reduced the risk of death by an average of 62% (95% CI 27%тАУ81%)" - considerably better than Molnupravir (sic). There's a lot more; it's a long paper, with immense detail. Dr. Theresa Lawrie, one of the lead authors, does exactly this sort of thing for the WHO. Maybe they didn't listen to her this time. I wonder why?
About "review" articles in general: they're valuable when no large CRT study has been done. Those are very expensive and take a long time, so they're at the mercy of those who dispense that kind of money. By combining many small studies, this one had over 2,000 subjects, and the multiplicity is a safeguard against bias, if they mostly agree, which they do in this case.
On the other hand, review articles usually make judgements about which studies to include; that makes for potential bias. This paper goes into that at length. Normally, it's probably not an issue, but it's more of a concern when the subject is highly controversial.
However, this study appears to have been done very carefully by highly qualified people.
It is not the only one.
Perhaps if you read something you might become informed.
Your strategy isnтАЩt working. You just look like youтАЩre spamming random replies that have no connection to the comments youтАЩre replying to.
I donтАЩt know if you think this is clever, but the total absence of anyone liking anything you write should tell you that no one is fooled by it. Have you considered just stopping?
You don't seem to realize that posting is his life; there can be no other rational explanation for why he could find the time to post non factual nonsense so many times. In between these posts, his most likely activity is sticking his hand in a pitcher of beer, trying to get his date drunk.
What I don't understand is why Linda Hagge, who is the rational and factual one, wastes so much of her time responding to him.
I can see with my own eyes just how inundated your comments here are with likes. I guess that makes my eyes liars? Good luck with that.
i was going to "like" but the button disappeared? so "like"
The student loans will just have to get prioritized over shoes. Or maybe not...
OMG! Thought criminals on isle 3! ThereтАЩs never a Thought Police officer around when you need one.
Except ivermectin doesnтАЩt cure or prevent Covid so what you're saying makes no sense. UP beat Covid with an extensive vaccination and track and test program. Same thing the WHO recommends. And fwiw Merck manufacturers ivermectin. I guess theyтАЩre conspiring against themselves.
Ivermectin is off patent and manufactured by generic drug manufacturers around the world. Merck no longer makes money off of it, in my understanding.
They still do make money from it, but since anyone can make it now, that money is declining. If they promoted it, they would lose their emergency use status for their new, more expensive drug that they are bringing out much too fast.
120 drug trials say you're wrong. You haven't read the actual science--you've just believed a media shill, a media that depends on pharma for 80% of its funding. Check PubMed for yourself and look at meta-analyses.
This is an outright lie. Uttar Pradesh has a vaxx rate less than 8%
Or, not: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/up-crosses-100-million-covid-vaccination-mark-cm-praises-health-workers-101632567600061-amp.html
That article is a couple weeks old and says there are 18M people fully vaccinated (~10%). The 100M is the total doses, which matches roughly the other trackers I can find. So comparatively less vaccinated than America, no matter how you cut it.
Some of the people distributing Ivermectin in Uttar Pradesh work for the WHO. Similarly, on the FDA's own official Youtube channel they host the video from this past September's vaccine and booster review where they discuss Ivermectin's success in India:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=WFph7-6t34M
^ the part I am referring to is somewhere about 4 hours and 5 to 20 minutes in, you can just adjust the scroll a little before there and skip to it if you would like to check. These are the FDA's own approved panel of experts reviewing the vaccine results this year sometime around September 12th-14th.
But the point of fact is: behind closed doors and out of the media eye, a number of the big experts both at the FDA and WHO think there is definitely something positive to Ivermectin in regards to combating Covid, to the point where the WHO themselves is delivering it to some places with low vaccination rates like Uttar Pradesh. Similarly just a month or so ago the two leading biologics (includes vaccines) heads at the FDA resigned because they thought the vaccines are being pushed by the CDC, the media, and Biden administration harder than the existing data warranted at this time and didn't want their multi-decade reputations associated with what could be the fallout. Apparently the former heads of vaccines at the FDA are "anti-vaxers" if the standard rubric is to be believed. These *ARE* the experts we are supposed to listen to, don't *YOU* believe the science?
I read that article. Something isn't translating right.
The only reason the moon landing hoax wasn't a hoax was that the Soviets confirmed what we were saying, with no good reason to do so except it was the truth. So modern people who weren't alive in 1969-72 were justified in at least questioning it.
I seem to remember a movie called Capricorn One from the 70s that was about hoaxing a Mars mission, so it isn't completely nuts.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capricorn_One
https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/no-fresh-covid-cases-in-up-s-59-districts-australian-mp-praises-yogi-govt-101631606229422.html
note, no mention of the poison shots.
If you are going to opine on ivermectin you owe it to yourself to learn something about it. A couple of good videos for you to get up the curve:
Dr. Kory: https://tinyurl.com/3ttbknet
Dr. Campbell: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hKa3EZqofNo&t=1189s
You're repeating Big Pharma propaganda. Here's a major review study that finds the opposite,credit John Hohn up above, listed on the NIH: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34469921/
As I said up there, we're all being gaslit by the industry and, to their eternal shame, the Democrats.
ЁЯдг
Do you honestly believe that the commenters here are so stupid that they cannot see through your psychologically dishonest, manipulative bs? Lol, youтАЩre giving all of us a pretty good laugh with your insipidity and inanity. Keep going! At least itтАЩs somewhat tepidly amusing on the amuso-meter.