"If he'd been vaccinated, he'd be alive right now."
"he died for nothing other than pig-headedness"
Really?
Man, you have super powers, please use them to get rid of this virus altogether.
Yep. Fluvoxamine and fluoxetine are not easy drugs to take. Lots of side effects which are worst in the initial weeks of treatment. Plenty of people will quit after a few days of nausea, dizziness, etc. Except guess what, stopping treatment suddenly can make things worse.
And of course a small number of people will react VERY badly to them and have feelings of suicidality.
The early Covid studies seem to show that they work best in early infection. So you would have to give them to people who people who may never go on to develop serious Covid.
Even if they do work on Covid, it's a very complicated question if it's actually worth it and we're probably a number of years away from knowing the answer.
I think they're purposely delaying the "Invermectin cures covid (and cancer and baldness)" studies being published until they have all the 5G embedded properly into the horse paste.
It's off patent, there is 0 reasons why Bill Gates can't have done this multiple times over and best yet, he'll be targeting those who won't take their 5G's from other sources.
I wonder whether there's any overlap between the people who asserted that Bill Gates was embedding mind altering chips in vaccines and those proposing to give mind altering drugs to everyone who tests positive (presumably that's what happens with "early intervention to prevent serious disease", or maybe is just those statistically at higher risk?).
Anyway, the Irish Times health editor put on the green jersey and wrote this a couple of days ago.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/health/cheap-existing-antidepressant-likely-weapon-against-covid-19-1.4659252?mode=amp
You've mentioned everything the page says in that post.
As opposed to making up **** it did not say in your previous one.
Glad the lessons are sinking in.
Conveniently leaving out the key sentences:
"LISTERINE® Antiseptic is not intended to prevent or treat COVID-19 and should be used only as directed on the product label."
"No evidence based conclusions can be drawn with regards to the anti-viral efficacy" means there is no known efficacy. None. Zero.
Why do you think they have created this webpage??
Why do you think they point out that they are "company firmly rooted in science"?
Why do you think the webpage links to actual, valid, proven, evidence based, effective means of Covid prevention, with the vaccine from the same company?
"The company has gone so far as to create a dedicated website, to debunk this conspiracy nonsense, and make absolutely clear that their Listerine mouth wash has no effect whatsoever in preventing or treating Covid:"
From the site you linked:
"More research is needed to understand whether the use of mouthwashes can impact viral transmission, exposure, viral entry, viral load and ultimately affect meaningful clinical outcomes."
They did not say that it has no effect whatsoever, since they cannot state that definitively. What they did say is that "no evidence-based clinical conclusions can be drawn with regards to the anti-viral efficacy of LISTERINE® Antiseptic mouthwash at this time."
Fun fact, since we've talked about repurposing in this thread: Listerine is repurposed floor cleaner.
Not. This. Again.
Link: LISTERINE USAGE GUIDELINES AND COVID-19
What's with all the anti depressants being peddled as the next big treatment?
It doesn't matter if it is effective in covid, you can't just throw antidepressants at people who are infected and not expect a wide range of side effects. It's not worth it, you're creating a problem to solve a problem.
Username almost, almost checks out!😮
No idea I'm too busy gargling Listerine.
Taste the rainbow.
This study was commissioned by German Health Authority.
They recommend gargling with listerine daily.
Japanese culture is deeply embeded with gargling iodine formulated mouth wash,
especially during flu season.
Its all in the report.
Gargling is not a cure for covid in the same way masks are not a cure either.
They all help to varying degrees.
How are Japan doing with covid deaths thus far?
That has all of them in one place.
Can you give some details of these . Were these controlled studies ? Volume of participants? Where are they published.
Every single trial warrants more trials.
There have been 4 trial results for fluvoxamine.
All have shown reduction in severe disease.
This trial saw a 30% reduction in severe disease.
All other trials had been higher improvement.
Ok, let's try to unwind an clarify this.
The first study is about "Survival of Patients with COVID-19 Pneumonia".
Meaning, patients that are already sick, in hospital, and are suffering from pneumonia.
From the study:
Patients received anti-COVID therapy including favipiravir, remdesivir and baricitinib as well as their combinations; and a state of the art medical treatment.
Conclusion: Fluoxetine may become a potent part of the treatment of COVID-19 pneumonia if our results are confirmed by randomized controlled studies.
---
The Irish Times piece is about something entirely different: Covid prevention.
Like the prevention we already have with vaccines, but much less effective - cutting hospital admissions by only 30%.
With the intended use case: "for poorer countries with low vaccination rates and lacking access to more advanced Covid-19 treatments."
So, in both cases, good, valid research, as long as it's read as intended by the authors.
That's the only version of that story that does not mention it warrants more trials and that the study is not yet peer reviewed.
He's been at this since May of last year with a hope to have results on 2-3 months. Here we are 13 months later. What are his results ? I see alot of maybes and Mays. Wheres the hard results he is a researcher afterall.
https://www.togethertrial.com/news
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3896539
Case control study (above) for Fluvoxetine released in late July from Hungary, which saw a 4 fold increase in survival in FLX treated patients in hospital.
Its close cousin (fluvoxamine) has similar results in terms of covid risk reductions (see above).
Its now getting irish press interest along with HIQA reviewing its covid treatment potential.
Very interesting, I think these drugs are more likely to be used in Ireland before Ivermectin as irish GP's have better knowledge of these drugs, prescribe them every day and trials/studies seem to be more conclusive than Ivermectin which appears to require prophylactic use to gain superior results.
Jesus wept. No critical thinking or actual research. Just forwarding **** from social media.
We're doomed.
OK, your post is a prime example of how to spread misinformation.
The picture you posted mentions a study. The picture itself is not from the study, it comes from the Twitter feed (512 followers) of an antivaxxer and conspiracy theorist, who made it up.
This person deliberately misspells Ivermectin as IVE*MECTIN in his Twitter feed, to avoid being caught by disinformation tracking.
So people in Africa who get Covid and have a serious infection with parasitic intestinal worms on top of that are more likely to die than the ones who get treated for the worms.
The pre-print, not peer reviewed, study that the quoted pic refers to is available here.
That's prozac. Do you really think that prescribing an anti-depressant to the general population to treat a respiratory disease is a good idea? Regardless of it being effective against Covid, there are very clear side effects and downsides to this.
People need to stop hyping these studies, what comes from this is a study into the mechanism that causes the effect on covid to try and create a treatment based on that, not prescribe Prozac, Hydroxycholoquine or whatever else to the general population.
It's an interesting point, but I suspect that there are very large differences in demographics and testing/reporting between the blue and yellow portions of that map.
I'd look at countries individually if I were you. Somalia is down as a non ivermectin country and Ethiopia is blue as an invermectin country but their death tolls are pretty much the same. South Africa highly inflates the non-ivermectin country figures also due to the impact the virus had there, far less rural compared to other countries. Not saying there wouldn't be an impact if looked at properly but the data on that continent is poor across the board, so I wouldn't hold much weight to that image.
Look lads if there was any anti- viral or respiratory benefit to ivermectin vets and farmers would have twigged its years ago
It seems to be working in parts of Africa....
That's another example of what happens on this topic. As the article states, more study is needed but reports like this rapidly become gospel that a said treatment absolutely works.
Quercetin is a vitamin(well, antioxidant), some people get enough already via diet and don't need it, those that don't get enough should adjust their diet to get more or take a vitamin, those that do get enough won't see any extra benefit from this. But again, the result is "healthier people have better outcomes when infected with SARS-COV2" which we already know.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w0.vanillicon.com/v2/0ff31c5efcae78d33c58211071909122.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://we.vanillicon.com/v2/eaabbaf8a16773590ee22dd6c15f1d68.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wc.vanillicon.com/v2/cc5c49cbcd8338fb80f9b4941d6b358e.svg)
