Forum Replies Created
I (65 years old woman) have been taking every two-week IVM prophylaxis doses since Christmas. My husband (73) has not. We are both not overweight and have good metabolic health. We live in Ontario where they are preaching fear re the new variants. We are not impressed with lockdowns, or with the evidence re the variants.
We have been meeting with friends and seeing people for dinner in private homes over the six weeks and we have been to a restaurant. Ontario is still in mask territory and reduced everything in terms of business openings. However, we have both had hair appointments, doctor and dentist appointments, and massage therapy.
Neither of us has gotten sick and we have likely not been exposed to the virus. In winter prior to Covid, I had four colds in a row. Nothing in 2020. I decided to take IVM (horse paste) because I have asthma and because of my frequent resp infections in the past.
So far so good. The virus is seasonal, so I will likely stop taking IVM at the end of March or in mid-April.
A Swiss doctor had this to say. Source: https://swprs.org/fight-against-ivermectin-begins/
The fight against low-cost and highly effective Ivermectin has begun.
Dozens of studies and several meta-studies have already found low-cost ivermectin to be highly effective against covid. In January, even the US NIH had to change its stance from ‘negative’ to ‘neutral’. Detractors of ivermectin had to act, but they knew that this time, it wouldn’t be easy.
In their fight against low-cost HCQ – which was also found to be effective in the early treatment of high-risk patients, thanks to its anti-inflammatory and anti-thrombotic properties – detractors published a made-up study in the Lancet (the Surgisphere scandal) and ran trials with toxic overdoses in ICU patients (the ‘SOLIDARITY’ and ‘RECOVERY’ trials). But Ivermectin is very difficult to overdose, and unlike HCQ, it works as a prophylaxis against infection and even in ICU patients.
Thus, it would be much more difficult to design a deceptive study against ivermectin.
Finally, a ‘solution’ was found: US pharmaceutical company Merck – one of the manufacturers of patent-free Ivermectin – has just published a statement simply claiming, without evidence, that their (unpublished) “analysis” had identified “no scientific basis for a potential therapeutic effect against COVID-19 from pre-clinical studies; no meaningful evidence for clinical activity or clinical efficacy in patients with COVID-19 disease; and a concerning lack of safety data in the majority of studies.”
An NIH operative quickly retweeted the Merck statement, adding: “Merck’s statement on ivermectin is the leadership and commitment to quality translational science that we need to see from pharma/biotech.” In reality, Merck’s claim is completely baseless and also ironic: after having safely sold ivermectin for several decades, Merck now suddenly questions its safety.
Interestingly, Merck recently signed a $356 million deal to supply the US with a much more expensive, newly developed experimental anti-covid drug. Meanwhile, Youtube removed a C-SPAN video of FLCCC President Dr Pierre Kory’s US Senate testimony on ivermectin.
The reality is this: a low-cost and highly effective drug against covid, like Ivermectin, would disrupt not only the multi-billion dollar global vaccine campaign (which does indeed lack long-term safety and efficacy data), but also follow-up ‘lock step’ policies like vaccine passports, smartphone-based global contact monitoring, as well as programs like ID2020 and ‘Known Traveler’ promoted by vaccine investor Bill Gates, the World Economic Forum, and similar groups.
Excellent piece. It appears that the authorities just can’t stand it when they are shown to have feet of clay.