Why is he complying? The world of research is a deathly boring place. If Ivermectin actually was useful, it would be a gamechanger. it isn't so it's not.
The truth ........ and the video evidence of it is available should you ever wish to see it.
Videos , Videos , Videos...
I don't want to watch a video I was taught how to read in the early 1960s.
I read it. It's barely coherent but I struggled through it. And it's all bollocks.
Hill was (allegedly) talking to Tess Lawrie, another famous anti vax liar. He just happened to confess to fabricating data to the one woman who desperately wanted this evidence?? I mean, that's pretty convenient, right?
And that's the thing about ivermectin, it's the same people cropping up all the time. This allegedly global phenomenon that has saved millions of lives is being driven by about half a dozen very dodgy people.
Like I said, cranks and right wing lunatics. There is no science here, only nasty people with fncked up agendas.
The only truth is that ivermectin does not cure covid in anything apart from a petri dish. Bleach cures covid too but I don't see people guzzling the Domestos.
Thanks for that link it's very enjoyable.
The ivermectin grifters and shills don't have much of an application for coherent writing it seems and their audience respectively does not have the application of reading comprehension (and summarisation and basic writing either for that matter!).
That's how you appeal to the ignorant and uneducated. First, scare them, then offer them a solution in patronising terms which they may understand, however hollow or grifting the solution may be.
Ivermectin has well documented capabilities as an antiviral and to an extent an anti-inflammatory. It is one element of treatment which if used correctly is effective.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8203399/
https://covid19criticalcare.com/covid-19-protocols/math-plus-protocol/
The truth is our medical system is not constructed to use logic. Medicine is influenced to a significant extent by industry through lobbying and inducement at various levels. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/apce.12341
Dr Seamus O’Mahony, consultant gasteroenterologist, when being interviewed about his book ‘Can Modern Medicine be Cured’ …. "frontline workers, GPs, hospital doctors, who may not be carrying out any of the research, who just do what they're told in a way. I've drawn a parallel between modern medicine and medieval church: the higher level lay out dogma, the lower level work on the front line and implement it. They are not supposed to question any of it"
Some of that metadata analysis is based on dubious data and FLCCC have been pushing Ivermectin relentlessly for 2 years. Talk about dogma! As others have said if it was really that good we'd be be hugging each other at massive NYE parties. But it's not, disappointingly for all of us. Even more disappointingly some people just will not let it go.
It appears to have a significant effect in countries where many ordinary people have worms. In those countries it seems useful in rich countries much less so.
Ivermectin is just one part of the protocol and is much safer and more effective than Remdesivir. There is no financial incentive though, which is the difference, and only doctors with courage and a conscience will take on the system.
The worms narrative doesn’t appear to make sense – if anything they may be protective against uncontrolled immune activation.
https://theparasiteblog.wordpress.com/2013/12/16/helminths-for-health/
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Yagoob-Garedaghi/publication/345324998_Protection_of_Parasites_Against_COVID-19_and_Other_Viruses/links/5fa3ed3892851cc2869606da/Protection-of-Parasites-Against-COVID-19-and-Other-Viruses.pdf
Tess Lawrie has contacted the PRINCIPLE trial to try and extract an update from them.
Chris Butler may be too busy to respond as he is now looking at Merck's molnupiravir treatment under the PANORAMIC trial.
https://www.nihr.ac.uk/news/ground-breaking-covid-19-antiviral-treatment-trial-opens-to-recruitment/29515
I've smelt a big lab rat in Merck/MSD from the beginning.
You sound like a tinfoiler tbh
Other very cheap and off-patent drugs like fluvoxamine (an SSRI) have been reported very recently as having some benefit for Covid like in the Together trial
The very same Together trial found no evidence whatsoever showing any benefit in the case of Ivermectin
Why would there be a conspiracy against Ivermectin solely and not against other cheap drugs like fluvoxamine .... ? - that makes absolutely zero sense.
And Tess Lawrie - that proven anti-vax misinformation fruitcake has actual minus-level credibility.
She, and a fair few others it seems, have built up a hill to die on and just can't seem to back down on Ivermectin in the face of lack of proper evidence of benefit - it's just looking increasingly more pathetic (if that's even possible in her case)
Seeing as Remdesivir has been shown to have limited to no clinical benefit for COVID, that's no great praise.
It makes perfect sense - other drug manufacturers either don't have competing offerings on patent or they are not willing to engage in sharp corporate practice during a pandemic.
Tinfoil hat? One of the first things taught in business school is that a company's primary goal is to increase share value. Until you look at the actions of a company through that lens you will remain naive.
Lawrie's letter is perfectly reasonable and even cites Lawrence who has been highly critical of meta-analyses.
Nice complete avoidance of my headline point!
so it's a conspiracy against Ivermectin but not against fluvoxamine or Dexamethasone which are also cheap and off-patent drugs?
that is absolute tinfoil-hat level stuff
or maybe it's just simply that Dexamethasone and Fluvoxamine DO ACTUALLY DO HAVE A BENEFIT FOR COVID and have proven so in credible trials and Ivermectin does not
Yeah, even if there is some big conspiracy at the heart of modern medicine, none of that changes the fact that ivermectin doesn't work for Covid.
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2109.13739
Let the character assassination begin!
There is a letter to the editors of the American Journal of Therapeutics also here from the authors of the paper here also:
https://journals.lww.com/americantherapeutics/Fulltext/2021/10000/Bayesian_Hypothesis_Testing_and_Hierarchical.8.aspx
We are two years into this argument and still there is no solid evidence that Ivermectin can ever be used. At this stage ,apart from pointless battles in dusty forgotten parts of the interweb, science has moved on and we have actual antivirals that work for COVID and Ivermectin is at teh bottom of a very steep hill to convince anyone. If all the wasted energy that has gone into this had been channelled into better studies we'd have a far less muddy answer on this.
Alternatively if Ivermectin had been allowed to be used by doctors in Western countries there would be no argument at all.
It would either have been proven to work or not.
Worst case is it would have been ineffective and done no harm.
The same could be said for hydroxycholoquine which was shown by NIH to have antiviral properties in 2005.
The real question that should be asked is why doctors have been prevented from treating their patients as they had previously been allowed to, but this only applied to some specific medications which have stellar safety.
They were allowed to be used in multiple trials that have shown it has no effect, it's an approved prescription medicine, the bar for getting it approved for other treatments is quite low and not that costly yet this hasn't been done and isn't even in the pipeline. Doctors don't just prescribe random medicines to people on the off chance it may work, that's not how medicine works (and funny that the IVM pushers that want to horse it into everyone are generally aghast at vaccines that have properly went through the approval process).
It’s all very ideological this argument. Neither side has much going on except as hominem and tribalism.
Solid critique.
There is no evidence!
It's not ideological
There is no properly validated evidence that Ivermectin is of any benefit for preventing or treating Covid
In fact it's to the contrary
Recent large-scale and professionally run trials such as the Together trial which was specifically looking at repurposed medicines like Ivermectin for treatment of Covid showed it to have no benefit.
This trial had well over 1,000 participants
The same trial found did find that another repurposed cheap and off-patent SSRI drug called fluvoxamine to have a statistically significant benefit for Covid treatment.
If Ivermectin had produced a statistically significant benefit it would have been reported as same.
The researchers commented that Ivermectin is a drug that is useful for non-Covid applications and would maybe be useful in places where parasitic infections are common
Researchers have trialed everything from HIV treatments to diabetes drugs for potential repurposing, Mills said. Some, such as ivermectin, have wound up becoming political beyond the science that brought them up for consideration.
“In the beginning, there was a lot of scientific interest in (ivermectin),” Mills said, because in computer modelling, it showed “signals” the anti-parasite drug could be effective against the COVID virus.
The drug, however, “also indicates it works for Ebola and Zika (virus) and everything,” he added.
Mills’ group, however, conducted the largest trial to show that ivermectin is not an effective treatment for COVID alone.
Unfortunately, those promoting ivermectin as a treatment are doing so blindly, Mills said, while critics dismiss the treatment unscientifically as a “horse dewormer,” when it has plenty of uses in humans.
“It’s a fantastic drug for conditions like river blindness and parasitic infections,” Mills said.
And the reason he doesn’t believe ivermectin should be completely dismissed is because “we don’t understand the role of parasite co-infection during COVID,” Mills said, including places where there are a lot of parasitic infections that end up in the lungs of patients.
“If you’re genuinely treating those (parasite) infections, you probably are having an effect on the COVID outcomes,” Mills said.
All the scientific evidence backs one side.
So there's that.
Why are doctors banned from prescribing ivermectin in ireland ? especially when it won the noble prize and classed as an escential medicine by the who .
The Japanese scientist Satoshi Omura has recently received the Nobel Prize in Physiology and Medicine for his discovery of ivermectin more than 30 years ago. Invermectin is best known for its extraordinarily broad spectrum of activity against nematodes, the roundworms that cause a large proportion of the most common neglected diseases on our planet. It is used to treat millions of people at risk of contracting devastating diseases, such as onchocerciasis and lymphatic filariasis, and also plays an important role in the control of intestinal helminth infections. Because of its excellent safety profile and broad spectrum of activity, ivermectin is catalogued by the World Health Organisation as an essential medicine and is regarded by many as a "magic bullet" for global health. The effectiveness of ivermectin against many diseases associated with poverty makes it a candidate to be one of the next breakthroughs in global health owing to its potential for improving quality of life and reducing mortality rates in low-income countries.However—and this is the catch—a “magic bullet” is of little use without a “magic gun”, and unfortunately ivermectin is not currently accessible to all the people in the world who need it.
There is not a big problem with river blindness or parasites in the water in Ireland.
That's why it's not really required here
It is available for prescription as a cream for Rosacea
https://www.medicines.ie/active-ingredients/ivermectin-24891/all/page-1/per-page-25
that doesnt explain why its banned . if there no parasite problem in ireland why are farm animals dosed every year with ivermectin.
yes it's used in veterinary use
it's not "banned" - it's not available for prescription
the tablets for humans are not available for prescription in the republic because there is no unique human medical need here for it that isn't covered by other medicines
if you don't "get that" then I can't help you
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w2.vanillicon.com/v2/24615175400ae675a1f589d8e5bd3285.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w7.vanillicon.com/v2/75771797d68b15f0c5c6e631c7bb7ced.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w8.vanillicon.com/v2/87962ff026856470eacf12f9c3179c90.svg)
