As far as I know there are not studies on the effectiveness of Tylenol on Covid. But if I am running a fever because of Covid tylenol is worth a try. All I ask is I have the freedom to do the same with ivermectin.
All of this could be solved by making ivermectin OTC. While states are making marijuana legal, why on earth does the WHO, CDC, FDA, NIH and HHS care if I want to give ivermectin a try to keep my post vaccine side effects or Covid case mild?
Similarly if I have natural immunity why do they want me to get vaccinated? And will they start pushing adults to get varicella vaccines? Six month ago I would have said that was stupid, they would never do that but now I’m not so sure.
11 Likes
Doctors from clinics all over the world just finished the 1st International COVID summit in Italy Sept 14-15. https://www.internationalcovidsummit.com/ As to it’s efficacy, how much antidotal evidence does the world need to START treating people before is too damn late!!!
6 Likes
If you look through my posts here, you’ll see that I didn’t begin by demanding anything of this community. All I did was criticize Chris’s presentation here, noting that he seemed to be arguing that the safety profile of Ivermectin was sufficient reason to prescribe it for COVID. I disagree with that, as I feel that efficacy absolutely has to be part of that equation, and he omitted any serious discussion of that from this video or (I think) his previous video (on Ivermectin toxicity).
In response to the above, many of you have asserted that Chris has discussed efficacy. I don’t see that he has recently, and the search functionality on this site makes it impossible to find such discussions. Therefore, I reasonably asked those of you making that assertion to provide a link. So far, none of you have, nor has Chris.
Instead, many of you have posted what you consider strong evidence of Ivermectin efficacy. It’s easy to find such articles; it’s also easy to find responses to them. The Ivermectin section of the video in #36 does a good job of challenging many of these claims. It wasn’t that I wanted any evidence; it was that I wanted the best evidence carefully scrutinized. Chris makes a point of digging into the evidence for, e.g., vaccines, and I was hoping to see the same analysis of the various Ivermectin claims. His censored video ended with a simple graph and no analysis other than sarcastic comments, and that certainly didn’t give the impression that he has carefully considered these claims, applying the same skepticism that he’s applied to the vaccines. Plenty of others have carefully considered the evidence for Ivermectin efficacy against COVID and come away unimpressed.
None of you owe me anything, and if you find me tiresome then by all means feel free to ignore my posts. Just don’t pretend that Chris has made a strong case in this video.
1 Like
In this group, we expect people to do their own homework. So if you are willing to spend 5 minutes (as I have just done) you will come up with very strong data in support of ivermectin's efficacy against Covid. For instance, https://ivmmeta.com/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8088823/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8248252/ There are many, many more such papers and reports. You do not have to be convinced by these data, but please do your homework first before you criticize Chris' opinions on IVM. Examine the data and tell us why you are not convinced.I agree that with 5 minutes one can find articles claiming evidence of efficacy; one can similarly find articles noting the flaws in many of those arguments (e.g., see #36). Dumping them on me and demanding that I refute all of them is fundamentally a Gish gallop, not exactly fair. The strongest evidence should withstand scrutiny and suffice on its own. That's what I've been asking for -- not any evidence, but the best evidence, analyzed thoroughly and honestly by Chris. That's not in this video, nor in his previous video, nor in anything that anyone has referred me to. I'll note that initially I only criticized Chris's "decision matrix," and it was the assertions that Chris has discussed evidence of efficacy that led me to ask "OK, where?"
Chris scouts information, summarizes it for us, and shows us both the data and explains his reasoning. Please do the same if you disagree. Do your homework.With respect to Ivermectin efficacy, I'm going to object with "facts not in evidence." Chris seems to believe that Ivermectin is effective against COVID. Is that belief well-founded? Maybe, but he hasn't presented the basis for that belief here, and others who have looked at the various studies have come away unconvinced and have raised significant objections.
I thought the video presented in comment 36 was really thought provoking although she lost me with her skepticism about Ivermectin. Apart from that they were really convincing about getting the vaccine IMHO. I would love to hear Chris debating with one or both of these two
2 Likes
You have to admit some of these were pretty funny
8 Likes
Joshua - Do you go around to other websites and argue the efficacy of the experimental mRNA injections they are calling vaccines?
The vaccines have directly killed tens of thousands maybe a whole lot more. Many of those killed had statistically no risk of mortality from C-19.
Ivermectin has been documented to have saved countless millions and not one death due directly to ivermectin. It is safer than aspirin and more effective than the JABs.
Since you are incapable of understand all of this it seems clear that your job here is to spread ignorance. But I suppose everyone needs to make a living.
6 Likes
The recent Biden statement the government will withold Monoclonal antibodies from red and Southern states is reprehensible. maybe Tue beginning g of killing us off, although some believe the “jab” is actually a form of population control, the limiting of Monoclonal antibodies to states with Democratic governors seems to me to be a death sentence to Republican states. Even the fully vaccinated have breakthrough cases of Covid.
4 Likes
Joshua - Do you go around to other websites and argue the efficacy of the experimental mRNA injections they are calling vaccines?There were studies demonstrating the effectiveness of the COVID vaccines, and they certainly looked good before Delta appeared. Since then things seem less clear, but they still seem effective at preventing serious outcomes. Also, given that the intent of these is to build immunity by simulating some aspects of the virus, I fail to see why these shouldn't be considered vaccines. Yes, they're made differently than previous vaccines, but my cellular phone is made differently from previous phones and yet I still consider it a phone.
The vaccines have directly killed tens of thousands maybe a whole lot more. Many of those killed had statistically no risk of mortality from C-19.You seem to be assuming that the deaths in the VAERS database can be directly linked to vaccine effects and that no one cares. I don't know that either of those are true. Moreover, I have a hard time understanding your latter comment. The vaccines cause your body to create a small amount of a material similar to that which COVID would cause to be repeatedly created. If the vaccine is really so dangerous for an individual, why wouldn't COVID be even worse for that same individual?
Ivermectin has been documented to have saved countless millions and not one death due directly to ivermectin.Possibly true, but irrelevant. It has saved lives by being used to treat various other infections, not COVID. I'll stipulate that it's safe when used properly by those who it's prescribed for and effective against those infections, and I agree that those who argue otherwise are making a mistake (and I've pointed this out in other venues). That doesn't imply that it's effective against COVID.
“Best Evidence” is subjective. Individuals are unique and population response to a drug does not follow a gaussian distribution that gets narrower with more data.
To me the best evidence is what seems to have worked for many, as opposed to the (easily manipulated) randomized control trial that uses a single drug at a specified dose and time. When conventional medicine has failed, functional medicine has often had success using Pascal’s wager with known safe drugs like ivermectin.
Watch Ivory Hecker’s interview with Joseph Varon at a Houston hospital. He has had great success treating Covid and was interviewed thousands of times by mainstream media for his secret. His answer, a combination of drugs including ivermectin. That didn’t get reported until a brave journalist resigned rather to submit to censorship.
This is the interview linked to from the FLCCC site, https://covid19criticalcare.com/
https://seed306.bitchute.com/nJZpoljWM26e/rvccR4Tg6fRS.mp4
But there is progress! This August 26th piece mentions his use of ivermectin and drug combinations. To cover all the legal bases, it finishes with the usual FDA warnings.
https://abc13.com/ivermectin-covid-treat-dr-joseph-varon-united-memorial-medical-center/10976044/
The best evidence for me is that I could breathe again a few hours after taking ivermectin. But high up on my evidence is that Varon interview, along with Big Pharma’s manic desire to prevent its use.
5 Likes
I think you ask a fair question here, but of course it strikes at a deeper issue. Why are some drugs only available by prescription in the first place? If that can be justified at all, and if requiring prescriptions for Ivermectin made sense before COVID, then the real question is if there’s sufficient reason to make it OTC now. Honestly, I’m not even sure what goes into such considerations.
Also, I agree that those pushing vaccine mandates should give more weight to natural immunity, or at least give a clear explanation for why that’s considered insufficient for our societal goals.
Please contribute to the discussion Josh. What is your model of Reality? I'm curious. Does the CIA conspire? Do the Chinese? The Russians? The British? In fact, every military organization on the planet. What evidence can you bring to bear on whether we are or are not the subject of an alien invasion? What are your ideals and how do you think we can achieve them?My model of reality is that groups of large organizations aren't conspiring against us and that those who have carefully reviewed the evidence of IVM efficacy and found it lacking aren't lying. Conspiracies exist, but how many players must be involved in artificially pushing down IVM if it really is as effective as the comments here claim? I can't prove that we aren't subject to an alien invasion, but I also don't see anything for which that is the most likely explanation. As for ideals, I do agree with Chris on at least one thing. Too many of the articles against IVM do indeed try to dismiss it as something like a horse dewormer. I want to see that ended, with that side accepting that IVM is used successfully to treat human infections; they can then turn to a careful consideration of the alleged evidence. Those who have done so have convinced me that there's no real reason to be confident in IVM's efficacy against COVID, but where I'm looking those arguments are outnumbered by those putting up absurd claims like "it's a medicine for animals and anyone considering using it is just stupid." That's a terrible way to persuade people that you aren't trying to hide something from them.
1 Like
You’re right, “best evidence” is subjective. I’d be happy with Chris pointing out the evidence that he considers best, along with his (usual) deep analysis of it.
To me the best evidence is what seems to have worked for many, as opposed to the (easily manipulated) randomized control trial that uses a single drug at a specified dose and time. When conventional medicine has failed, functional medicine has often had success using Pascal's wager with known safe drugs like ivermectin.I'm glad that people are getting good results. If someone wants to use IVM and has their doctor's approval and guidance, I say more power to them. However, that's different from saying that we should be recommending it as a society and making it part of our standard treatment plan; that requires a higher bar to be met. Joseph Varon's success is inspiring. He admits that he throws the "kitchen sink" at his patients, and we don't know how his overall level of care and the nature of his particular patients compare to those of the areas that his results are compared against. Maybe something in his protocol is particularly effective against patients that reach him and warrant that level of care.
1 Like
This is a tough video to watch. 20 minutes into it (it’s over 2 hours long) I’m already astonished at the distortions. Dr Seheult asserted that the VAERS system data is just whatever anybody chooses to type in. In fact the majority of the entries are from physicians and other health care professionals. He asserted that the multiple entries on the death certificates are because covid causes death in a variety of ways. In fact, the reporting instructions issued by Feds require covid to be listed first if the patient tests positive for covid or if s/he has exhibits any symptoms of covid infection. There is also a strong financial incentive for biased reporting since the hospital receives additional payment from Federal funds for any covid patients they treat.
Chris analyzed the Israeli paper cited early in your video. There were several holes in it which biased the results. His analysis can be found in one of his previous videos.
An additional confounding factor has recently been uncovered. When someone presents less than 14 days from the date of their final vaccine shot they are classified as unvaccinated. They are not reclassified when 14 days pass. Since most vaccine complications occur within a few days of the jab the effect is three fold: vaccine side effects are not identified, number of unvaccinated patients is increased relative to vaccinated patients, if they die the number of unvaccinated covid deaths is increased.
I don’t think I can spare the time required to watch this the rest of the way.
8 Likes
Perhaps many of us in this community have grown loathsome of our bureaucracies comprised of experts and politicians where obfuscation are their specialties. More times than not, seemingly complex problems can be mitigated with simple strategies. Having witnessed a near complete dismissal of evidence based let alone rudimentary medicine is terrifying!
From the outset, decades old peer reviewed papers surfaced showing significant efficacy of vitamin D’s role in modulating immune response as it relates to respiratory viral infections. Zinc, food based ionophores, sleep hygiene, NAC, liposomal glutathione, beta glucans, etc., have proven themselves worthy of mention. Where are those guidelines coming from? The guidelines I’ve been listing to are nothing more than incredibly complex intervention strategies burped up from elite pricks suffering from a bad case of hubris or something more nefarious!
Now we are looking down the barrels of inverse reality and damage control by those in charge. Vaccine, vaccine, more vaccine and Remdesivir is all these reprobates are clinging to! After eighteen months of a science fiction screen play Steven King couldn’t have imagined continues to play out, most infected people are still instructed to go home until breathing difficulties ensue. Are we kidding? Are we taking our cues from those malfeasants who perpetuated this “we need large RDBPC studies” on all that’s not vaccine or Remdesivir? And right in the heart of a shit storm they’ve created? All hands on deck! Any port in a storm! This is all they have left us. I’ll take my educated chances with Ivermectin, doxycycline, nutraceuticals and even the gummie bears you mentioned.
I’m quite sure the folks here do not have a beef with you personally. We are just tired with all the obfuscations, out right lies, deception, shaming and get in line orders coming from the top. And most of all, we are tired of watching loved ones and friends dying or becoming disabled due to illness or “vaccine”.
8 Likes
While I fundamentally disagree with the idea that an extremely safe drug with early positive observational signals has to have a bevy of RCT’s before it can be used or recommended (clearly neither of which applied to Remdesivir nor convalescent plasma) I’m happy to discuss my reasons for believing it has a strong-enough positive signal to vigorously endorse and recommend.
I was unable to put any discussion of treatments on Youtube as even covering papers proved to be sufficient to get me banned. It happened twice.
So I put my best efforts over here on the website and behind the paywall because I didn’t want Google’s prying eyes anywhere near my better work.
Back there you will find an excellent interview with Pierre Kory where he covers the totality of the evidence.
We have:
- Powerful observational data from doctors who have collectively treated tens of thousands of early, mid and severe Covid patients with spectacular results.
- We have country-level epidemiological data even including huge real-world experiments where a country (e.g. Peru) would go on IVM then off due to political pressures, then back on againw ith cases and deaths tracking with an ~1 week lag. See also Uttar Pradesh, Mexico City, parts of Brazil, etc.
- Both RCT and prospective and retrospective clinical trials numbering in the dozens with the overwhelming majority of them showing very positive results.
- Meta-analyses combining all the studies in 3 above showing exceptionally positive benefits.
- My own anecdotal experiences which now number in the many dozens. Exactly zero of the people I have tracked closely through their use of IVM upon first symptom onset have progressed to the hospital. There was one member here (Steve) who reported not having that experience and going to the hospital despite IVM use. So including his experience then my results pretty closely track the studies that say “IVM is pretty darned good, but not perfect.”
It’s really rather blindingly obvious the stuff works.
22 Likes
Josh-
You’re about 12 months late to the party. You haven’t seen the story evolve the same way we have. But that’s ok. Better late than never.
Highest standard is a meta analysis. There are two of them. First: Kory et al:
https://journals.lww.com/americantherapeutics/fulltext/2021/06000/review_of_the_emerging_evidence_demonstrating_the.4.aspx
And:
https://journals.lww.com/americantherapeutics/Fulltext/2021/08000/Ivermectin_for_Prevention_and_Treatment_of.7.aspx
Hope that helps.
3 Likes
Is this the WXYZ fb post you are referring to?
https://m.facebook.com/wxyzdetroit/photos/a.461583946134/10158207966696135/?type=3&source=48
Thanks.
1 Like