COVID-19 Cases Plummet in India as They Distribute Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine

a reply to: Doctor Smith

India; 200 Covid-19 deaths per million residents.

USA; 1,805 Covid-19 deaths per million residents.


As you can see at this link, 99 other countries on the planet have higher death percentages than India.

Covid-19 Global Stats: www.worldometers.info...


But the media hyped India, like it was/is a Covid-19 catastrophe. Why?

a reply to: chr0naut

Change your news sources since January and in
India develops COVID treatment kit for less than $3 per person with ‘miraculous’ ivermectin

'Utilizing early treatment with hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin, the densely populated India, which has four times the population of the U.S., has less than half of the coronavirus related deaths’

Here's the two lowest states with a population on par with the USA

“By the end of 2020, Uttar Pradesh — which distributed free ivermectin for home care — had the second-lowest fatality rate in India at 0.26 per 100,000 residents in December. Only the state of Bihar, with 128 million residents, was lower, and it, too, recommends ivermectin,” writes Mary Beth Pfeiffer of TSN.

-- Uttar Pradesh has 240 million people.

lets consider it a 100% random control trial
USA and their hospitals and standards of living as the control 320 million
to Uttar Pradesh & Bihar mass migration of workers and poor health care 368 million.

Result USA had more deaths as the control group with western WHO standard of care.

-Was it politics? Kory a life long democrat was accused of it by the democrat senator - watch the senate hearing.

originally posted by: kwakakev
a reply to: opethPA

So if i wanted to verify the claims of this thread where would I go about doing it?

www.c19study.com

Is a good starting point that is compiling a meta data analysis from all the available medical literature around.

So this link has proof of the thread claim or its an argument for the drugs being discussed?

Each is different.

Uttar Pradesh government says early use of Ivermectin helped to keep positivity, deaths low

"Uttar Pradesh was the first state in the country to introduce large-scale prophylactic and therapeutic use of Ivermectin. In May-June 2020, a team at Agra, led by Dr Anshul Pareek, administered...

This site has pulled together some information and links in favour of Ivermectin - NOTE YOU have to follow the links for more information this is just a summary site. India Just Became Latest Country to Approve Use of Ivermectin to Treat Covid-19

a reply to: Breakthestreak

What part of low certainty of evidence don’t you get?

a reply to: St Udio

So who supplies ivermectin if not “pharmabeasts”?

originally posted by: puzzled2
a reply to: chr0naut

Change your news sources since January and in
India develops COVID treatment kit for less than $3 per person with ‘miraculous’ ivermectin

'Utilizing early treatment with hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin, the densely populated India, which has four times the population of the U.S., has less than half of the coronavirus related deaths’

Here's the two lowest states with a population on par with the USA

“By the end of 2020, Uttar Pradesh — which distributed free ivermectin for home care — had the second-lowest fatality rate in India at 0.26 per 100,000 residents in December. Only the state of Bihar, with 128 million residents, was lower, and it, too, recommends ivermectin,” writes Mary Beth Pfeiffer of TSN.

-- Uttar Pradesh has 240 million people.

lets consider it a 100% random control trial
USA and their hospitals and standards of living as the control 320 million
to Uttar Pradesh & Bihar mass migration of workers and poor health care 368 million.

Result USA had more deaths as the control group with western WHO standard of care.

-Was it politics? Kory a life long democrat was accused of it by the democrat senator - watch the senate hearing.

And when was it actually distributed? And in what numbers? Surely those are really pertinent details. Surely those should be published as part of peer reviewed and widely published studies.

YouTube and social media are not the places to publish such studies. They are not scientifically rigorous, and they are not moderated. People can lie, quite convincingly when they control the narrative.

People will die if the stories are untrue. You have a responsibility to ensure that the truth is both verified, and verifiable. There has been too much propaganda that tries to circumvent proper scientific process, which has a pedigree of hundreds of years of cynical and careful pursuit of the truth.

Fight "the plan".

originally posted by: Chadwickus
a reply to: St Udio

So who supplies ivermectin if not “pharmabeasts”?

Well, it appears that Ivermectin is NOT supplied by your "pharmabeasts", but rather chemical companies, and other 'raw' materials types.

www.buyersguidechem.com...

I am from India. I want to share with you all about my observations. I have noticed some families where 1 or 2 above 45 years persons got vaccinated with covishield and the rest of family gets infected. The vaccinated persons develop fever and then recover soon. But the others go through the regular Covid ordeal. I know 18 crore people have been vaccinated. But some of them are acting as superspreaders.

And since there has been vaccine shortage from around May 1st, I feel the decrease in cases from 15 th May is due to the lack of vaccination. Now even the gap for second dose of covishield has been extended to 12 weeks and the CEO of Serum Institute has run away to London.

It’s all my interpretation, though in the media the decrease is being attributed to decline in testing.

originally posted by: GraffikPleasure

originally posted by: panoz77
a reply to: Doctor Smith

Join the transvaxinites.

I

We are growing!

Don't forget, we are having our next nonsocial distancing, social next weekend!

I’m in. A regularly meeting anti social (distancing) social club. Trans(vaxinite) and proud.

Is there Merch?

originally posted by: Chadwickus
a reply to: Doctor Smith

Ivermectin and HCQ is only being given to those with mild symptoms and as a secondary option

As per their guidelines..

www.icmr.gov.in...

Is it working?

originally posted by: Chadwickus
a reply to: Randyvine

It doesn’t.

Which is why it’s on the list of “May do” for mild symptoms.

Desperate situations call for desperate measures.

It’s NOT being used on anyone with moderate to serious symptoms, therefore NOT stopping COVID in India at all.

It’s pretty simple.

Hold on.

Desperate measures? Mild symptoms. Anyone else picking up a whiff of stupidity?

It MAY work so let’s use it on really mild, desperate cases?!!

Lots of hopeum on here that these drugs don’t work and more people die. Orange Man can not be right - by any means necessarily.

If the same type of critical thinking was directed at the so called vaccines that have not gone through adequate trials and never made it to the approval stage in the past we may actually end up agreeing on something.

originally posted by: Jimy718

originally posted by: Chadwickus
a reply to: St Udio

So who supplies ivermectin if not “pharmabeasts”?

Well, it appears that Ivermectin is NOT supplied by your "pharmabeasts", but rather chemical companies, and other 'raw' materials types.

www.buyersguidechem.com...

I bought my Ivermectin through Pharmabeast. My regular pharmacy played dumb and acted like it would take 6 months or something? So I googled it and bought it from CVS drugstore. Had to have my prescription switched over. Used my insurance to get it for nothing.

originally posted by: TzarChasm
Please tell me there's a better source than bitchute.

This is the only guy for outpatient treatment the NIH ever published, Tucker is interviewing him. Very informative, he tells you exactly what happened.

This Dr speaks "some" truths regarding "covid" and the "covid mrna shots"

a reply to: chr0naut

Ok you said you could only find it being distributed in GOA, I proved you failed to find the many many mainstream news articles showing it was distributed to 2 other Indian States, I also linked to a page with lots of links to other countries using Ivermectin.

So instead of acknowledging you did a poor job of research, you counter with another dumb argument about distribution numbers and Studies.

You said

You have a responsibility to ensure that the truth is both verified, and verifiable.

It is the trouble is YOU don't like the truth, so will attack the messenger and ignore the evidence.

Some weird comment.

People will die if the stories are untrue.

From what? Ivermectin has been used for 35+ years no-one died from using it, you can't say the same about the WHO treatment after 1,000s have died from the experimental vaccines and the other WHO recommended drugs like Tylenol?

This is the only true statement

There has been too much propaganda that tries to circumvent proper scientific process,

Which is why "scientific" papers against the cheap treatments by nobodies are getting publish and then retracted after making the MSN circuit.
But experts with 1,000s of publish papers get past peer review and rejected by the editor.

The simple truth is Ivermectin is working saving lives - the Remdesivar trial was stopped earlier because it saved 2 days in hospital and wasn't ethical to continue. But Ivermectin needs a RCT with dead bodies in a control group to satisfy your need before so no-one on the forum deems it worthy.

Don't bother responding unless your expert data and trial was conducted by someone with more qualifications than
these people
FLCCC Contributions to the Field of Medicine

Resources for Health Professionals

You've already proven your inability to find accurate and truthful information, that is easily available in MSN, so being unable find and understand proper evidence it explains why you only accept a CNN version of the world.

originally posted by: puzzled2
a reply to: chr0naut

Ok you said you could only find it being distributed in GOA, I proved you failed to find the many many mainstream news articles showing it was distributed to 2 other Indian States, I also linked to a page with lots of links to other countries using Ivermectin.

So instead of acknowledging you did a poor job of research, you counter with another dumb argument about distribution numbers and Studies.

You said

You have a responsibility to ensure that the truth is both verified, and verifiable.

It is the trouble is YOU don't like the truth, so will attack the messenger and ignore the evidence.

There is a lot of BS being pushed, for political purposes, which is not the truth.

All the health authorities that have the highest credibility, a history of care, and scientific rigor are being called into disrepute by organizations that didn't exist a few months or a year ago. And these fly-by-night 'experts' push their opinions mostly on social media, dodgy websites, or 'web news' headlines. Figure it out!

Some weird comment.

People will die if the stories are untrue.

From what? Ivermectin has been used for 35+ years no-one died from using it, you can't say the same about the WHO treatment after 1,000s have died from the experimental vaccines and the other WHO recommended drugs like Tylenol?

Seriously ill people who avoid effective medicines and self-administer a less effective medicine, that does have side effects which they aren't being told about, and is contraindicated in several medical situations, are likely to die of largely untreated complications, or of overdose, or underdose, or complex interactions of a dodgy medicine itself.

People have died from adverse reactions to Ivermectin, probably in effect with other drugs or medical issue, which it can exacerbate:

Serious Neurological Adverse Events after Ivermectin—Do They Occur beyond the Indication of Onchocerciasis? (pdf)

Serious adverse reactions associated with ivermectin: A systematic pharmacovigilance study in sub-Saharan Africa and in the rest of the World - PLOS

Why would the CDC, WHO, and a number of health authorities around the world, be cautious about Ivermectin if there wasn't good reason? Thinking that they want people to die, or be ill, makes no sense. It is an irrational belief.

If you think about it, the fact that you don't seem to have ANY adverse reaction information for a fairly common medicine, should raise some red flags, should it not?.

Ivermectin also has caused blindness, male infertility, and strokes. Why no mention of those issues on the sites you post from? Sites which also, almost universally, say that the vaccines are dangerous (they are, very rarely but occasionally they are) and ineffective (they aren't, as far as the current and accumulating data tells us).

This is the only true statement

There has been too much propaganda that tries to circumvent proper scientific process,

Which is why "scientific" papers against the cheap treatments by nobodies are getting publish and then retracted after making the MSN circuit.

But experts with 1,000s of publish papers get past peer review and rejected by the editor.

Or the situation is not as clear cut as you have painted it, or the papers have been submitted to a publisher or repository, but aren't actually peer reviewed.

The simple truth is Ivermectin is working saving lives - the Remdesivar trial was stopped earlier because it saved 2 days in hospital and wasn't ethical to continue. But Ivermectin needs a RCT with dead bodies in a control group to satisfy your need before so no-one on the forum deems it worthy.

Doctors in the USA are using HQC, Zinc supplements, and Ivermectin in an attempt to save their patients. Sometimes at the request of the patients.

Sometimes, it just doesn't help. Sometimes patients have conditions which preclude their use.

Until we can actually evaluate these treatments rather than being swamped in BS, cherry-picked data, and dubious anecdotal situations, the sooner we may get the medicines and treatments into more use (if they prove effective and safe).

Don't bother responding unless your expert data and trial was conducted by someone with more qualifications than these people
FLCCC Contributions to the Field of Medicine

Damning with Faint Praise? MedPage Today’s POV of the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance

Resources for Health Professionals

You've already proven your inability to find accurate and truthful information, that is easily available in MSN, so being unable find and understand proper evidence it explains why you only accept a CNN version of the world.

The CDC, WHO, major research hospital groups such as Johns Hopkins and Mayo clinic, are more credible and pedigreed. Yet you act like these small groups are somehow more credible. When did that happen? When did some fly-by-night special interest group become the medical orthodoxy?

a reply to: chr0naut
your paper

Serious Neurological Adverse Events after Ivermectin—Do They Occur beyond the Indication of Onchocerciasis? (pdf)

Forty-eight cases have been reported from multiple countries

The mechanism of these events has been debated in the literature, largely focusing on the role of concomitant infection with Loa loa versus the presence of mdr-1 gene variants in humans allowing ivermectin penetration into the central nervous system.

But the WHO pushes Remdesivar oops no it kills people don't use it oh okay you can now. flipflop why?

From your other link

Damning with Faint Praise? MedPage Today’s POV of the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance

First, if the FLCC were just some random group of physicians just in search of media attention, they certainly would not have been invited to the apex research agency Panel to present their findings. The FLCCC physicians are highly respected critical care doctors who have published many peer-reviewed articles. Second, they are not alone as the work of Andrew Hill, Ph.D., associated with the University of Liverpool in the UK, gains more attention across the Atlantic. Third, they are working in a more agile and lean manner, viewing data from the lens of a risk-based approach, much like the U.S. FDA embraced years ago for exploring regulatory risk. Perhaps Dr. Joffe introduces the “either-or” false dilemma to the equation?

FYI Ivermectin is a part of a protocol not a standalone and does not prevent any other treatment and is not intended to replace Vaccines merely keep people alive to make a choice.

Now do the same research for the CDC's and WHO's recommended drugs including Tylenol.

Take your "RCT" evidence on all drugs prescribed by the WHO and CDC for the treatment of sars-cov-2 infection and compare them to I-Mask protocol for the treatment of sars-cov-2 infection.
Then tell me which kills more?

You could ask yourself why doesn't the CDC report on more than a horse cream? no evidence on their website.
You keep blindly following those that profit and I'll follow those that treat and teach.

It will eventually turn out who was right and hopefully there will be consequence to those that lied and caused unnecessary deaths.

a reply to: Doctor Smith
Once I found Trump saying the most stupid things about how we could possibly cure covid. So Trump himself must have been stupid.
Sorry mr Trump, I was wrong about you. About everything you said it seems you were right ... even about the most stupid thing I once thought I ever heard of ...
www.independent.co.uk...