Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 ... 11
Send Topic Print
Professor Robert Clancy backs ivermectin as a COVI (Read 5075 times)
Gordon
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20628
Gordon
Gender: male
Re: Professor Robert Clancy backs ivermectin as a COVI
Reply #30 - Jul 18th, 2021 at 10:36am
 
freediver wrote on Jul 18th, 2021 at 10:08am:
Ajax wrote on Jul 18th, 2021 at 10:02am:
freediver wrote on Jul 18th, 2021 at 9:58am:
Ajax wrote on Jul 18th, 2021 at 9:54am:
freediver wrote on Jul 18th, 2021 at 9:50am:
Ajax wrote on Jul 18th, 2021 at 9:46am:
freediver wrote on Jul 17th, 2021 at 12:12pm:
Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 16th, 2021 at 10:41pm:
freediver wrote on Jul 16th, 2021 at 9:51pm:
I don't get the fascination the lunatic fringe has with ivermectin. It's used by vets to treat parasites like worms. You might as well brush your teeth with tinea cream.


Are you suggesting these 2 links are the lunatic fringe?
https://www.monash.edu/discovery-institute/news-and-events/news/2020-articles/La...
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.06.21259924v1

I don't know why people bother with Tinea cream it's expensive more of a hassle and slower to cure tinea than using bleach.

If you have tinea splash some bleach on shower floor spread it around with your feet for about 30 seconds then have a shower your tinea will be cured in 1-3 days.

Try it i bet you will never buy tinea cream again.


I understand why researchers might be interested. What I don't understand is the fascination the lunatic fringe has for it.


You mean to tell me that because some doctors are saying that Ivermectin works because they have used it and seen the results and the government is saying that's its quackery you don't find this interesting.

Well then FD you just listen to the government pythias for your stable diet of truth mate.


The quackery is the army of ignorant morons getting involved in what is a very technical argument. There are literally thousands of promising treatments currently under investigation. We are already rolling out vaccines. But only Ivermectin gets the meme junkies all wet. Why?


You dont get it do ya....!?

If Ivermectin does the job where does that leave big pharma and the people behind like Billy (goat) Gates who have poured billions of dollars in to these crop of vaccines.

So you recon billy goat will promote Ivermectin because he is such a philanthropist...LOL 


Ivermectin is big pharma. Yet somehow the people who sell it have co-opted an army of "anti big pharma" internet warriors to sell it for them. Why are they so easy to manipulate, and why did this work so well? Does it have hallucinogenic side effects or something?


Have you heard of the simplest explanation is probably the correct one.

Therefore KISS...!


What is the simplest explanation? That the army of internet morons have backed a winner in the race to develop a treatment for Covid, but are being thwarted by a grand conspiracy of big pharma, who actually sell ivermectin, to prevent ivermectin being revealed as the cure for head lice, worms, coronaviruses and limp, lifeless hair?


Ivermectin is cheap, off patent, easy to make so no money in it.
Back to top
 

IBI
 
IP Logged
 
Gordon
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20628
Gordon
Gender: male
Re: Professor Robert Clancy backs ivermectin as a COVI
Reply #31 - Jul 18th, 2021 at 10:38am
 
Ivermectin: Can a Drug Be "Right-Wing"?

A potential Covid-19 treatment has become hostage to a larger global fight between populists and anti-populists

On December 31st of last year, an 80 year-old Buffalo-area woman named Judith Smentkiewicz fell ill with Covid-19. She was rushed by ambulance to Millard Fillmore Suburban Hospital in Williamsville, New York, where she was put on a ventilator. Her son Michael and his wife flew up from Georgia, and were given grim news. Judith, doctors said, had a 20% chance at survival, and even if she made it, she’d be on a ventilator for a month.

As December passed into the New Year, Judith’s health declined. Her family members, increasingly desperate, had been doing what people in the Internet age do, Googling in search of potential treatments. They saw stories about the anti-parasitic drug ivermectin, learning among other things that a pulmonologist named Pierre Kory had just testified before the Senate that the drug had a “miraculous” impact on Covid-19 patients. The family pressured doctors at the hospital to give Judith the drug. The hospital initially complied, administering one dose on January 2nd. According to her family’s court testimony, a dramatic change in her condition ensued.

“In less than 48 hours, my mother was taken off the ventilator, transferred out of the Intensive Care Unit, sitting up on her own and communicating,” the patient’s daughter Michelle Kulbacki told a court.

After the reported change in Judith’s condition, the hospital backtracked and refused to administer more. Frustrated, the family turned on January 7th to a local lawyer named Ralph Lorigo. A commercial litigator and head of what he calls a “typical suburban practice,” with seven lawyers engaged in everything from matrimonial to estate work, Lorigo assigned one of his attorneys to review materials given to them by the family, which included Kory’s Senate testimony. The associate showed Lorigo himself the the material next morning.

“I was so convinced by what Dr. Kory was saying,” Lorigo says. “I saw the passion and the belief.”

Lorigo immediately sued the hospital, filing to State Supreme Court to force the facility to treat according to the family’s wishes. Judge Henry J. Nowak sided with the Smentkiewiczes, signing an order that Lorigo and one of his attorneys served themselves, and after a series of quasi-absurd dramas that included the hospital refusing to let the Smentkiewicz family physician phone in the prescription — “the doctor actually had to drive to the hospital,” Lorigo says — Judith went back on ivermectin.

“She was out of that hospital in six days,” Lorigo says. After a month of rehab, his octogenarian client went back to her life, which involved working five days a week (she still cleans houses). Her story, complete with photo, was told in the Buffalo News, causing Lorigo’s phone to begin ringing off the hook. Doppleganger cases soon began dotting the map all over the country.

One of the first was in nearby Rochester, New York, where the family of Glenna Dickinson went through an almost exactly similar narrative to the Smentkiewiczes: they read about ivermectin, got a family doctor to prescribe it, saw improvement, only to later have the hospital refuse treatment. Again Lorigo intervened, again a judge ordered the hospital to treat, again the patient recovered and was discharged.

Hospitals fought hard, hiring expensive law firms, at times going to extraordinary lengths to refuse treatment even with dying patients who’d exhausted all other options. At Edward-Elmhurst hospital in Chicago, a 68 year-old named Nurije Fype was admitted, put on a ventilator, and again, as all other treatments failed, her family got a judge to order the use of ivermectin. Lorigo claims the hospital initially refused to obey the court order, which led to the filing of a contempt motion, which in turn led to a pair of counter-motions and another confrontation before another befuddled Judge named James Orel.

“Why wouldn't this be tried if she's not improving?” the Chicago Tribune quoted Orel as saying. “Why does the hospital object to providing this medication?”

“He basically said, ‘What do you have left?’” Lorigo recounts. “No one would administer the ivermectin. It’s as safe as aspirin, for Christ’s sake. It’s been given out 3.7 billion times. I couldn’t understand it.”

Stories like these aren’t proof the drug works. They don’t even really rise to the level of evidence. People recover from diseases all the time, and it doesn’t mean any particular treatment was responsible. Short of the gold standard of randomized controlled trials, there’s no proof.

However, anecdotes have a power all their own, and in the Internet age, ones like these spread quickly. Lorigo estimates he now gets “10, 15, 20” calls and emails a day. At this level, at the bedside of a single Covid-19 patient who’s already received the full official treatment protocol and is failing anyway, the decision to administer a drug like ivermectin, or fluvoxamine, or hydroxychloroquine, or any of a dozen other experimental treatments, seems like a no-brainer. Nothing else has worked, the patient is dying, why not?

Telescope out a little further, however, and the ivermectin debate becomes more complicated, reaching into a series of thorny controversies, some ridiculous, some quite serious.

Cont...
Back to top
 

IBI
 
IP Logged
 
Gordon
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20628
Gordon
Gender: male
Re: Professor Robert Clancy backs ivermectin as a COVI
Reply #32 - Jul 18th, 2021 at 10:38am
 
Cont..

Telescope out a little further, however, and the ivermectin debate becomes more complicated, reaching into a series of thorny controversies, some ridiculous, some quite serious.

The ridiculous side involves the front end of Lorigo’s story, the same story detailed on this site last week: the censorship of ivermectin news that, no matter what one thinks about the evidence for or against, is clearly in the public interest.

Anyone running a basic internet search on the topic will get a jumble of confusing results. YouTube’s policies are beyond uneven. It’s been aggressive in taking down videos containing interviews with people like Kory and doling out strikes to independent media figures like Bret Weinstein, but an interview with Lorigo on TrialSite News containing basically all of the same information is still up, as are clips from a just-taped episode of the Joe Rogan Experience that feature both Weinstein and Kory. Moreover, all sorts of statements at least as provocative as Kory’s “miraculous” formulation in the Senate still litter the Internet, many in reputable research journals. Take, for instance, this passage from the March issue of the Japanese Journal of Antibiotics:

    When the effectiveness of ivermectin for the COVID-19 pandemic is confirmed with the cooperation of researchers around the world and its clinical use is achieved on a global scale, it could prove to be of great benefit to humanity. It may even turn out to be comparable to the benefits achieved from the discovery of penicillin…

There clearly is not evidence that ivermectin is the next penicillin, at least as far as its effects on Covid-19. As is noted in nearly every mainstream story about the subject, the WHO has advised against its use pending further study, there have been randomized studies showing it to be ineffective in speeding recovery, and the drug’s original manufacturer, Merck, has said there’s no “meaningful evidence” of efficacy for Covid-19 patients. However, it’s also patently untrue, as is frequently asserted, that there’s no evidence that the drug might be effective.

This past week, for instance, Oxford University announced it was launching a large-scale clinical trial. The study has already recruited more than 5,000 volunteers, and its announcement says what little is known to be true: that “small pilot studies show that early administration with ivermectin can reduce viral load and the duration of symptoms in some patients with mild COVID-19,” that it’s “a well-known medicine with a good safety profile,” and “because of the early promising results in some studies, it is already being widely used to treat COVID-19 in several countries.”

The Oxford text also says “there is little evidence from large-scale randomized controlled trials to demonstrate that it can speed up recovery from the illness or reduce hospital admission.” But to a person who might have a family member suffering from the disease, just the information about “early promising results” would probably be enough to inspire demands for a prescription, which might be the problem, of course. Unless someone was looking for that information, they likely wouldn’t find it, as mainstream news even of the Oxford study has been effectively limited to a pair of Bloomberg and Forbes stories.

Ivermectin has suffered the same fate as thousands of other news topics since Donald Trump first announced his run for the presidency nearly six years ago, cleaved in two to inhabit separate factual universes for left and right audiences. Repurposed drugs generally have had a hard time being taken seriously since Trump announced he was on hydroxychloroquine last year, and ivermectin clearly also suffers from its association with Republican Senators like Ron Johnson. Still, the drug’s publicity issues go beyond the taint of “conservative” news.

The drug has become a test case for a controversy that’s long been building in health care, about how much input patients should have in their own treatment. Well before Covid-19, the medical profession was thrust into a revolution in patient information, inspired by a combination of Google and new patients’ rights laws.

Should people on their deathbeds be allowed to try anything to save themselves? That seems like an easy question to answer. Should the entire world be allowed to practice self-care on a grand scale? That’s a different issue. Some would say absolutely not, while others would say the corruption of pharmaceutical companies and the medical system unfortunately make it a necessity. The world is increasingly divided along this trust/untrust axis.
Back to top
 

IBI
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Online


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49098
At my desk.
Re: Professor Robert Clancy backs ivermectin as a COVI
Reply #33 - Jul 18th, 2021 at 10:39am
 
Are you trying to say that the "simple explanation" is the grand conspiracy by big pharma to not sell drugs?
Back to top
 

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Gordon
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20628
Gordon
Gender: male
Re: Professor Robert Clancy backs ivermectin as a COVI
Reply #34 - Jul 18th, 2021 at 10:46am
 
My position is to show you the actual censorship which is happening around the ivermectin debate.

Read these two excellent Matt Taibbi articles and

Why Has "Ivermectin" Become a Dirty Word?

At the worst moment, Internet censorship has driven scientific debate itself underground
Matt Taibbi Jun 19

On December 8, 2020, when most of America was consumed with what The Guardian called Donald Trump’s “desperate, mendacious, frenzied and sometimes farcical” attempt to remain president, the Senate’s Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee held a hearing on the “Medical Response to Covid-19.” One of the witnesses, a pulmonologist named Dr. Pierre Kory, insisted he had great news.

“We have a solution to this crisis,” he said unequivocally. “There is a drug that is proving to have a miraculous impact.”

Kory was referring to an FDA-approved medicine called ivermectin. A genuine wonder drug in other realms, ivermectin has all but eliminated parasitic diseases like river blindness and elephantiasis, helping discoverer Satoshi Ōmura win the Nobel Prize in 2015. As far as its uses in the pandemic went, however, research was still scant. Could it really be a magic Covid-19 bullet?

Kory had been trying to make such a case, but complained to the Senate that public efforts had been stifled, because “every time we mention ivermectin, we get put in Facebook jail.” A Catch-22 seemed to be ensnaring science. With the world desperate for news about an unprecedented disaster, Silicon Valley had essentially decided to disallow discussion of a potential solution — disallow calls for more research and more study — because not enough research and study had been done. Once, people weren’t allowed to take drugs before they got FDA approval. Now, they can’t talk about them.

“I want to try to be respectful because I think the intention is correct,” Kory told the committee. “They want to cut down on misinformation, and many doctors are claiming X, Y, and Z work in this disease. The challenge is, you’re also silencing those of us who are expert, reasoned, researched, and extremely knowledgeable.”

Eight million people watched Kory say that on the C-SPAN video of the hearing posted to YouTube, but YouTube, in what appears to be a first, removed video of the hearing, as even Senate testimony was now deemed too dangerous for public consumption. YouTube later suspended the Wisconsin Senator who’d invited Kory to the hearing, and when Kory went on podcasts to tell his story, YouTube took down those videos, too. Kory was like a ghost who floated through the Internet, leaving suspensions and blackened warning screens everywhere he went.

One of the challenges of the pandemic period is the degree to which science has become intertwined with politics. Arguments about the efficacy of mask use or ventilators, or the viability of repurposed drugs like hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin, or even the pandemic’s origins, were quashed from the jump in the American commercial press, which committed itself to a regime of simplified insta-takes made opposite to Donald Trump’s comments. With a few exceptions, Internet censors generally tracked with this conventional wisdom, which had the effect of moving conspiracy theories and real scientific debates alike far underground.

A consequence is that issues like the ivermectin question have ended up in the same public bucket as debates over foreign misinformation, hate speech, and even incitement. The same Republican Senator YouTube suspended for making statements in support of ivermectin, Ron Johnson, has also been denounced in the press for failing to call the January 6th riots an insurrection, resulting in headlines that blend the two putative offenses.

“You have these ideas about the need to censor hate speech, calls for violence, and falsity,” Kory says, “and they’ve put science on the same shelf.”

As a result, doctors and organizations that may have little to do with politics but have advocated for ivermectin, from Dr. Tess Lawrie’s British Ivermectin Recommendation Development (BIRD) to California pulmonologist Roger Seheult to many others, have been shut down online with the same unilateral abruptness platforms apply to hate speech or threats. Dr. Sabine Hazan, a gastroenterologist and CEO of a genetic sequencing laboratory called ProGenaBiome in Ventura, California, was blindsided. She got involved with ivermectin when she was pulling out the stops for Covid-19 patients.

“I’m a doctor. My job isn’t to do nothing. If I wanted to do nothing, I’d be selling shampoo,” Hazan says. When patients got really sick, she tried everything, treating off-label with a number of drugs in combination, including ivermectin. Eventually, she ended up taking it upon herself to run clinical trials with repurposed, off-patent drugs like ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, fearing that the lack of a profit angle would prevent a major corporate effort in that direction.

“I felt, no one is going to be investigating a cheap solution, so I did it myself,” she says.

Some weeks ago, Hazan got up early on a Sunday to present findings to a group of physicians that included Dr. Kylie Wagstaff, one of the physicians in the first in vitro ivermectin study, a family doctor in Zimbabwe named Jackie Stone, and others.

She uploaded the talk on YouTube, and “lo and behold, it got taken down. It’s amazing. These are doctors talking. It’s not anyone selling anything.”
Back to top
 

IBI
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Online


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49098
At my desk.
Re: Professor Robert Clancy backs ivermectin as a COVI
Reply #35 - Jul 18th, 2021 at 10:47am
 
Earth to Gordon: Are you trying to say that the "simple explanation" is the grand conspiracy by big pharma to not sell drugs?
Back to top
 

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Gordon
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20628
Gordon
Gender: male
Re: Professor Robert Clancy backs ivermectin as a COVI
Reply #36 - Jul 18th, 2021 at 10:54am
 
freediver wrote on Jul 18th, 2021 at 10:47am:
Earth to Gordon: Are you trying to say that the "simple explanation" is the grand conspiracy by big pharma to not sell drugs?


I'd say without a doubt, if an off-patent cheap as chips drug which is effective as both a prophylactic to prevent Covid and treat the disease came along, (and I'm not saying it is) companies who've invested billions into vaccine development would use every bit of their considerable influence to make sure their vaccines remained financially viable.
Back to top
 

IBI
 
IP Logged
 
Ajax
Gold Member
*****
Offline


CO2 has never controlled
temperature on Earth

Posts: 10982
Australia
Gender: male
Re: Professor Robert Clancy backs ivermectin as a COVI
Reply #37 - Jul 18th, 2021 at 10:56am
 
Gordon wrote on Jul 18th, 2021 at 10:54am:
freediver wrote on Jul 18th, 2021 at 10:47am:
Earth to Gordon: Are you trying to say that the "simple explanation" is the grand conspiracy by big pharma to not sell drugs?


I'd say without a doubt, if an off-patent cheap as chips drug which is effective as both a prophylactic to prevent Covid and treat the disease came along, (and I'm not saying it is) companies who've invested billions into vaccine development would use every bit of their considerable influence to make sure their vaccines remained financially viable.


Its like talking to a brick wall with FD he has the blinkers on and nothing will remove them imo.
Back to top
 

1. There has never been a more serious assault on our standard of living than Anthropogenic Global Warming..Ajax
2. "One hour of freedom is worth more than 40 years of slavery &  prison" Regas Feraeos
 
IP Logged
 
Gordon
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20628
Gordon
Gender: male
Re: Professor Robert Clancy backs ivermectin as a COVI
Reply #38 - Jul 18th, 2021 at 10:57am
 
Have we ever seen examples of corporate giants using their influence to obtain outcomes they desire?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merchants_of_Doubt
Back to top
 

IBI
 
IP Logged
 
Gordon
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20628
Gordon
Gender: male
Re: Professor Robert Clancy backs ivermectin as a COVI
Reply #39 - Jul 18th, 2021 at 10:59am
 
Ajax wrote on Jul 18th, 2021 at 10:56am:
Gordon wrote on Jul 18th, 2021 at 10:54am:
freediver wrote on Jul 18th, 2021 at 10:47am:
Earth to Gordon: Are you trying to say that the "simple explanation" is the grand conspiracy by big pharma to not sell drugs?


I'd say without a doubt, if an off-patent cheap as chips drug which is effective as both a prophylactic to prevent Covid and treat the disease came along, (and I'm not saying it is) companies who've invested billions into vaccine development would use every bit of their considerable influence to make sure their vaccines remained financially viable.


Its like talking to a brick wall with FD he has the blinkers on and nothing will remove them imo.


I'm totally agnostic on whether ivermectin works, or doesn't, but I've been following the very real censorship on the issue.
Back to top
 

IBI
 
IP Logged
 
Ajax
Gold Member
*****
Offline


CO2 has never controlled
temperature on Earth

Posts: 10982
Australia
Gender: male
Re: Professor Robert Clancy backs ivermectin as a COVI
Reply #40 - Jul 18th, 2021 at 11:05am
 
Gordon wrote on Jul 18th, 2021 at 10:59am:
Ajax wrote on Jul 18th, 2021 at 10:56am:
Gordon wrote on Jul 18th, 2021 at 10:54am:
freediver wrote on Jul 18th, 2021 at 10:47am:
Earth to Gordon: Are you trying to say that the "simple explanation" is the grand conspiracy by big pharma to not sell drugs?


I'd say without a doubt, if an off-patent cheap as chips drug which is effective as both a prophylactic to prevent Covid and treat the disease came along, (and I'm not saying it is) companies who've invested billions into vaccine development would use every bit of their considerable influence to make sure their vaccines remained financially viable.


Its like talking to a brick wall with FD he has the blinkers on and nothing will remove them imo.


I'm totally agnostic on whether ivermectin works, or doesn't, but I've been following the very real censorship on the issue.


The question I have is if you are on your death bed with covid-19 why not let them use it.

Probably too late by then but hey some doctors have used it and seen that it works advertise it only to get censored, so hey I'm with you.....WHY...????
Back to top
 

1. There has never been a more serious assault on our standard of living than Anthropogenic Global Warming..Ajax
2. "One hour of freedom is worth more than 40 years of slavery &  prison" Regas Feraeos
 
IP Logged
 
aquascoot
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 34812
Gender: male
Re: Professor Robert Clancy backs ivermectin as a COVI
Reply #41 - Jul 18th, 2021 at 11:06am
 
I was listening to a very good podcast Gordon which featured 2of the top intensive care specialists in the United states

And they both seemed convinced that ivermectin had a role in treatment
That it was safe
And that it should be being used

And if people think big pharma who are the largest contributors to not just politicians but most research labs are going to be happy about handing over all those profits so that a cheap as chips drug can be used instead

You are beyond naive
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Gordon
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20628
Gordon
Gender: male
Re: Professor Robert Clancy backs ivermectin as a COVI
Reply #42 - Jul 18th, 2021 at 11:10am
 
Ajax wrote on Jul 18th, 2021 at 11:05am:
Gordon wrote on Jul 18th, 2021 at 10:59am:
Ajax wrote on Jul 18th, 2021 at 10:56am:
Gordon wrote on Jul 18th, 2021 at 10:54am:
freediver wrote on Jul 18th, 2021 at 10:47am:
Earth to Gordon: Are you trying to say that the "simple explanation" is the grand conspiracy by big pharma to not sell drugs?


I'd say without a doubt, if an off-patent cheap as chips drug which is effective as both a prophylactic to prevent Covid and treat the disease came along, (and I'm not saying it is) companies who've invested billions into vaccine development would use every bit of their considerable influence to make sure their vaccines remained financially viable.


Its like talking to a brick wall with FD he has the blinkers on and nothing will remove them imo.


I'm totally agnostic on whether ivermectin works, or doesn't, but I've been following the very real censorship on the issue.


The question I have is if you are on your death bed with covid-19 why not let them use it.

Probably too late by then but hey some doctors have used it and seen that it works advertise it only to get censored, so hey I'm with you.....WHY...????


One thing that is universally agreed about Ivermectin, it's totally safe and has been handed out by the BILLIONS.
Back to top
 

IBI
 
IP Logged
 
Gordon
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20628
Gordon
Gender: male
Re: Professor Robert Clancy backs ivermectin as a COVI
Reply #43 - Jul 18th, 2021 at 11:13am
 
Putting aside whether the drugs works for Covid or doesn't, the bloke who discovered the drug, Nobel Prize winner Satoshi Omura had his Youtube discussion on it pulled.
Back to top
 

IBI
 
IP Logged
 
Sir lastnail
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 30090
Gender: male
Re: Professor Robert Clancy backs ivermectin as a COVI
Reply #44 - Jul 18th, 2021 at 12:00pm
 
Hunt goes off script with ivermectin
Health minister endorses doctors’ right to treat Covid


https://app.spectator.com.au/2021/07/hunt-goes-off-script-with-ivermectin/pugpig...

Quote:
The first essential element in responding to any pandemic is not a vaccine, which does nothing for people already infected, it is treatment. Indeed, an effective treatment reduces the circulation of a virus reducing the chances of mutations and makes a mass vaccination program safer and more effective.

It is to Australia’s credit that one of the most effective treatments was identified at Monash University along with the Doherty Institute which showed that ivermectin kills the Sars-CoV-2 virus within 48 hours. Yet to our national shame, the researchers have been starved of resources and the discovery ignored.

Not so in Indonesia where an enterprising philanthropist, Haryoseno, leapt into action and made ivermectin available to the masses for free or at low cost. As a result, Indonesia has had an extremely low Covid mortality rate. That is until the Ministry of Health decided, in line with the WHO’s recommendation, that ivermectin would only be used in a clinical trial. Haryoseno has been threatened with a fine and a ten-year jail sentence and the supply of ivermectin has dried up. Result? Deaths per million have increased five-fold since withdrawal of ivermectin on 12 June.
Back to top
 

In August 2021, Newcastle Coroner Karen Dilks recorded that Lisa Shaw had died “due to complications of an AstraZeneca COVID vaccination”.
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 ... 11
Send Topic Print