Ivermectin: Could Population-Wide Distribution Have Prevented China's Recent Mass COVID Outbreak?

a reply to: Maxmars


Ivermectin effect™ goes much further away than just covid , it has anti-cancer effect also ,hence the big fight against it, since cancer is also big $$$$$$$ .


Therapeutics and repurposed drugs for the treatment of cancer


In other words , Ivermectin seem to be quite good drug for prevention/treatment of cancers

originally posted by: Kenzo
a reply to: Maxmars


Ivermectin effect™ goes much further away than just covid , it has anti-cancer effect also ,hence the big fight against it, since cancer is also big $$$$$$$ .


Therapeutics and repurposed drugs for the treatment of cancer


In other words , Ivermectin seem to be quite good drug for prevention/treatment of cancers

I've talked to people who took it for covid that healed other chronic issues as well.

Very interesting . Thanks for posting ,

a reply to: Ophiuchus1

Approved because it does no harm, NOT because it does anything at all.

3mg in a human is quite literally no more than a placebo. Like taking a half shot of whiskey every morning expecting to eventually get drunk.

For comparison, the recommended dose for a freaking cat is .5mg - 1.5mg PER KILO!

Pharma companies that bring out crap like this sicken me. If you are gonna use it, at least do it in doses that will actually make a difference (60mg tablets anyone?)

I've not read anything that convinces me it "Cures Covid" ... but no harm, no foul.

My belief is that it may help with pre-existing conditions, so as a result you wont get covid "as bad".

I did read way back that IF it had actually been routinely administered to covid infected humans back in 2020 that the sheer volume of doses that would have been required globally would have had a knock-on effect of literally killing the agriculture industry overnight due to the limited number of companies producing it and the fact that it is absolutely necessary to prevent the spread of disease in animals.

End result: Using it as a frontline drug for covid may have ended up killing more in the long term.

a reply to: TheResidentAlien

Since the human version Ivermectin was approved as a generic, all it means is that it’s cheaper as an alternative to the Merck brand Stromectol (Ivermectin)……the 3mg is not the suggested dosage.

There is a recommended 12mg per day dosage consisting of 4x3mg pills per day x 5 days for a total of 60mg dosage to take

Source: A five-day course of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19 may reduce the duration of illness

Abstract Ivermectin, a US Food and Drug Administration-approved anti-parasitic agent, was found to inhibit severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) replication in vitro. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was conducted to determine the rapidity of viral clearance and safety of ivermectin among adult SARS-CoV-2 patients. The trial included 72 hospitalized patients in Dhaka, Bangladesh, who were assigned to one of three groups: oral ivermectin alone (12 mg once daily for 5 days), oral ivermectin in combination with doxycycline (12 mg ivermectin single dose and 200 mg doxycycline on day 1, followed by 100 mg every 12 h for the next 4 days), and a placebo control group. Clinical symptoms of fever, cough, and sore throat were comparable among the three groups. Virological clearance was earlier in the 5-day ivermectin treatment arm when compared to the placebo group (9.7 days vs 12.7 days; p = 0.02), but this was not the case for the ivermectin + doxycycline arm (11.5 days; p = 0.27). There were no severe adverse drug events recorded in the study. A 5-day course of ivermectin was found to be safe and effective in treating adult patients with mild COVID-19. Larger trials will be needed to confirm these preliminary findings.

The Ivermectin for humans was developed for not only parasites in horses, but humans to.

Here are the dosages per weight when it comes to treating parasites in humans….source previously posted page 1 this thread…..from Merck’s data sheet



So you see ….. dosages whether for parasites or post catching Covid unvaccinated ….have been worked out. It’s not just a one 3mg pill.

Of course it’s not an outright cure in the classical sense of the word “cure”.

Doctors don’t cure….they prescribe. There’s no money in real cures……

Imagine if there was one pill, one injection, an herb that once taken will actually cure all Cancers. The next day…..all Cancer related industry would be obsolete. Researchers, Scientists, etc….will be out of jobs and businesses closed. Who would want that!

What makes more sense as a business model to Big Pharma’s………a one shot solution that will really Cure ailments once and for all…….or…..the constant year round selling of temporary remedies for the same ailments?





Here’s an earlier Ivermectin thread you might want to read up on….

www.abovetopsecret.com...

👽

Claiming Ivermectin is just "horse paste" is as misleading as telling people that water is just "nuclear reactor coolant". It's anti-viral properties have also been well known for quite a while.

It is a Nobel Prize winning human drug considered an "essential medicine" (for humans) by the WHO along other drugs, many of which also have a veterinary equivalent due to similarities among mammals in general (eg. aspirin, penicillin, cortisone).

It's difficult to understand with so much evidence in favour of benefit (RCT's, observational trials, clinician findings and even a noticed dose dependant response) and excellent safety profile from billions of doses over decades, that it was propagandised and in some places outright banned. Even Merck misleadingly doubted its "safety".

It seems a lot of people went to great lengths to not find out if it helped against covid. If the injectables had been subject to a fraction of the (often unreasonable) scrutiny they would never have been used.

Anyone remember the meta analysis for the WHO which was going to recommend for Ivermectin use, yet shortly before submission the author admitted to being pressured to change "the conclusion" (for reasons $unknown$)? In fact we know now not only that his paper was altered by a ghost writer shortly before submission, we know who the writer was and the corporate/financial conflicts of interest involved. Thanks to Phil Harper (some of these articles are paywalled, but there's enough free to get the gist).

Early in the pandemic an Aussie doctor (Thomas Borody, famous for his pioneering "triple therapy" cure for ulcers) alerted his government that he was having great success against covid using a triple therapy of Ivermectin, zinc and doxycycline. Of course they showed no interest in finding out if it worked and responded by banning the (off label) use of Ivermectin for non "approved" indications. Then a smear campaign was launched against him. Very similar to what happened to some excellent doctors in the US.

Similar to hydroxychloroquine, which showed great potential for the original SARS, but somehow became "dangerous" in 2020. Based on a fraudulent study published in the Lancet and others where people were given abnormally large doses, sometimes with a different form of chloroquine.

This whole area of "scientific research" has now become an ideology. Based on corruption and controlled by corporations and easily corruptible/inept bureaucrats masquerading as scientists and "ex-spurts".

"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts." -Feynman.

In reality, ivermectin’s role in human medicine began in 1978 inside the
MSDRL, with William Campbell being the driving force behind the investigation
of the potential for human use.....

In 1981, MSDRL’s Mohammed Aziz, previously of the WHO, undertook a small clinical trial of ivermectin in patients with safety paramount. Commencing with a very low dose of 5 µg/kg, he found that a single dose of 30 µ/kg substantially decreased skin microflariae and confirmed that the effect lasted for at least 6 months, with no serious adverse events. His tests concluded that doses up to 200 µg/kg were safely tolerated.....

Merck received approval from French authorities in 1987 allowing human use of ivermectin. In a hitherto unprecedented gesture, immediately following registration, ivermectin (branded as Mectizan®) was donated free of charge by Merck & Co. Inc., under the direction of Roy Vagelos (Fig. 24), for the treatment of Onchocerciasis (River Blindness), with KI foregoing all royalties. The donation was for as long as the drug was required, in the amounts that were needed. This represented the first such large-scale drug donation initiative and it has resulted in the world’s largest, longest-running and most successful drug donation programme.


www.nobelprize.org...

Anyone remember this little episode? It might be at the very same time both the funniest and most ridiculous part of the Ivermectin propaganda campaign. Truly hilarious lol. All manner of covid fanatics pounced on it. Surely to be successfully fact checked by FOX indicates you are having a bad journalistic day?

Such a level of gullibility could help explain quite a lot. We have someone with the twitter name of "No Lie", actively spreading lies lol. A post doc (and supposedly an) "academic" specialising in the study of "mis/disinformation"...devoting a whole twitter thread to actively spreading disinformation! lol.

There is at least one semi credentialed pseudo scientific zealot, known more for an unbridled arrogance and devotion to their own opinion than anything else. You might find some favourites of your own in this lot.

threadreaderapp.com...

www.biznews.com...

An interesting article I ran across on Ivermectin effectiveness.

From 2015….

Nobel Goes to Pioneers of Natural-Based Medicines

These men should be applauded!

👽

originally posted by: TheResidentAlien
a reply to: Ophiuchus1

3mg in a human is quite literally no more than a placebo. Like taking a half shot of whiskey every morning expecting to eventually get drunk.

For comparison, the recommended dose for a freaking cat is .5mg - 1.5mg PER KILO!

Ummm. no?

End result: Using it as a frontline drug for covid may have ended up killing more in the long term.

Well, you are actually very wrong, so there is that...

The recommended dose isn't 1.5mg/kg. You're off by a factor of 10 (you misplaced the decimal).

It is 0.15mg/kg. Big difference.

That destroys your entire narrative, no?