"Censorship of ivermectin" Topic

Ivermectin Wins in India
News of India's defeat of the Delta variant should be common knowledge. It is just about as obvious as the nose on one's face. It is so clear when one looks at the graphs that no one can deny it.
Yet, for some reason, we are not allowed to talk about it. Thus, for example, Wikipedia cannot mention the peer-reviewed meta-analyses by Dr. Tess Lawrie or Dr. Pierre Kory published in the American Journal of Therapeutics.

link
Wikipedia is not allowed to publish the recent meta-analysis on Ivermectin authored by Dr. Andrew Hill. Furthermore, it is not allowed to say anything concerning ivmmeta.com showing the 61 studies comprising 23,000 patients which reveal up to a 96% reduction in death [prophylaxis] with Ivermectin.
link
One can see the bias in Wikipedia by going on the "talk" pages for each subject and reading about the fierce attempts of editors to add these facts and the stone wall refusals by the "senior" editors who have an agenda. And that agenda is not loyalty to your health.
The easy way to read the "talk" page on any Wikipedia subject is to click the top left "talk" button. Anyone can then review the editors' discussions.
There is a blackout on any conversation about how Ivermectin beat COVID-19 in India. When I discussed the dire straits that India found itself in early this year with 414,000 cases per day, and over 4,000 deaths per day, and how that evaporated within five weeks of the addition of Ivermectin, I am often asked, "But why is there no mention of that in the news?"
Yes, exactly. Ask yourself why India's success against the Delta variant with Ivermectin is such a closely guarded secret by the NIH and CDC. Second, ask yourself why no major media outlets reported this fact, but instead, tried to confuse you with false information by saying the deaths in India are 10 times greater than official reports". ….
…
It continues for much longer, but I guess there is some rule on TMP about excessive quotes.

It's a horse dewormer?

Slate: link

Ivermectin is the new hydroxychloroquine, take 4: Fraud, incompetence, or both?

link

link

"Just as Galileo proved with his telescope that the earth was NOT the center of the Universe in 1616; today, the data from India shows that Ivermectin is effective, much more so than the vaccines."

Galileo was considered a heretic in his day. He was going against the "science".

What is this, fakebook? When someone can't argue the facts they resort to ridicule or censorship. Ivermectin has shown to be highly effective in India. But it is an inexpensive drug; big pharmaceutical corporations are making billions and will not allow the narrative to change.

The available scientific evidence does not support the use of ivermectin, an antiparastic drug, for the treatment or prevention of COVID-19 outside the context of clinical trials, according to a new report from Cochrane, an international organization that reviews medical research and provides guidance about clinical practice…

The Scientist: link

Article is behind a paywall, but the headline is death toll from Covid seems to be 6 times official figures. link

I.e. main stream media is not always trying to 'confuse the facts'.

Guardian article on invermectin pointing out that the large review supporting the drug appears to be faked. link

Nick, why do you think there are so many fraudulent articles by doctors on the efficacy of ivermectin? (Which is a very inexpensive drug) Serious question. What is their incentive? Why is big tech censoring; why don't they let the people decide through frank and open discussions. Why did YouTube just ban a US Senator (who is also a medical doctor)?

On the other hand follow the money. Big pharma is making $billions$ in discrediting any covid treatments outside of their vaccines.

Do remember that 'Big Pharma' HAS TO MAKE billions to
off-set the BILLIONS of dollars in fines levied by the
US Government over the years for, among other issues,
falsifying test data, suppressing clinical trial results
and various other nefarious activities.

Note: NOT talking vaccine-related issues but related
to MEDICINES or therapeutic drugs.

And always remember that the pharmaceutical companies
basically extorted from the Congress of the US
'freedom from lawsuit' legislation such that if bad
things result from a vaccine, the victim has no legal
recourse against the company which created it.

And always remember that the pharmaceutical companies
basically extorted from the Congress of the US
'freedom from lawsuit' legislation such that if bad
things result from a vaccine, the victim has no legal
recourse against the company which created it.

True, since vaccination are probably one of the most cost-effective public health measures. Therefore the US Government (and this has been replicated across many different countries) have programs to compensate people that have severe adverser reactions to vaccinations. link

Why are some people irrational conspiracy theorists? Because they're just plain loopy! (Or they're being paid to spread disinformation…)

I've been aware of the Ivermectin issue for a while. I think it's not equatable (yet) with hydroxychloroquine, as there is better, if flawed, evidence behind it. It's perhaps a "case not proven" situation, that warrants further research.

It's not dismissable as a horse dewormer as it has long-established use in human populations.
Is big pharma suppressing it? I don't know, but it's not the likeliest explanation to me (as nefarious as that industry can be).

It's not an alternative to vaccination. Vaccination has a small possibility of as yet unseen problems, but you have to weigh that against the very present, obvious dangers that Covid19 presents.

It's sad that we've got to the point that scientific discussion has become a public sport where medical treatments are cheered and booed like racing teams in the hippodrome.

@altfritz +1

The Guardian article points out that there are lots of studies of Ivermectin. However, the single largest study that supports Ivermectin has issues and has been removed. Once that large study is removed the balance of the other studies is mixed.

Fraud within a study is not unheard of – e.g. a study on global warming's impact on fish. And a study doesnt prove a theory – google 'replication crisis'. I suspect this is still in the basket of 'more information needed'

As to the larger point of wikipedia suppressing facts -- I have been in several debates on articles where enviromentalists have tried to present opinion or quotes out of context as fact. Senior editors have supported me. I doubt there is any plan to hide facts. Editors are volunteers, and there is a barrage of people trying to 'correct' wikipedia to their own crazy view. They cant get it right first time all the time. But they can be reasoned with.

This is hilarious – why are anti-vaxxers always so keen on taking "wacky drug cocktails" instead?

"You've got a Covid vaccine ? Well, I don't want that, give me a malaria drug and a horse dewormer and I'll wash it all down with some yummy bleach."

(Disclaimer: please, please, please – don't do any of those things)

Martin from Canada : +1 on the Carl Sagan quote.

why are anti-vaxxers always so keen on taking "wacky drug cocktails"

I'm not anti-vax. I'm a retired 20 year veteran. I've received many vaccinations throughout my career. The Covid mRNA jab is not a vaccine. Argue your point without attacking the individual, especially when you had it wrong saying I'm anti-vax.

Why did YouTube just ban a US Senator (who is also a medical doctor)?

The ophthalmologist? Who created his own board to certify himself? This guy?

link

Thank you clibinarium and Nick for adding valid reasonable points to this discussion. There is a tremendous amount of conflicting information concerning Covid. Info comes in so fast it's hard to keep up with everything. I just saw an article that said Gibraltar with a 99% vaccination rate is seeing a spike in Covid cases. I think the main problem is that Covid has been politicized and most people are just repeating the talking points from their chosen media. Why are so many doctors risking their careers and coming out against the so called vaccine?

The Covid mRNA jab is not a vaccine.

Please define "vaccine" and "mRNA", and how they differ.

If you check wikipedia: "A vaccine is a biological preparation that provides active acquired immunity to a particular infectious disease." (Iowa administrative code). So the Covid vaccines are vaccines.

TRUST THE SCIENCE!! — COVID VAX NARRATIVE DESTROYED IN 6 MIN 32 SEC

link

Well, there is your "science" and then there is real science.
Have a nice day.

What are you touting next? Oleander? Bleach? UV light? Carbonara Romana?

You didn't watch the video.

@USAFpilot – I never said that YOU were an anti-vaxxer, I said that anti-vaxxers have more trust in a whacky cocktail of medicines/cleaning products rather than a dedicated specific treatment and that that behaviour is hilarious (to me). It's also inexplicable.

Why they try and persuade people away from a dedicated treatment to a non-treatment based on…actually I don't know what it is based on. One anti-vaxxer was VERY keen on bleach. That's an extremely painful method of suicide, not a cure for Covid but it was actually put forward as a "sensible cure". That's just bizarre. All one can say is "just don't do that" and at the same time wonder why someone would even think it is a good idea.

There are people out there that get their "kicks" from messing other people up. Like that waste-of-skin that was encouraging/goading girls to commit suicide a few years back.

Yeah, I think there's a lot of truth in that. That's much worse than being a bit dumb/confused – maliciously enjoying misleading people into harming themselves is a particularly unpleasant form of evil intent.

I hope that Ivermectin (or something else) is discovered to be effective against Covid.

But I don't think the evidence for Ivermectin is there yet, and I certainly wouldn't risk my life on it. I did the vaccine, and no regrets so far.

smart move !

You didn't watch the video.

Did you? Whoever that guy was, and he spoke too quickly for me to catch his name, he said that vaccines don't stop you getting infected, but they prevent you from getting symptomatic.

Isn't that the whole point of getting vaccinated? I might still catch Covid, but it's not going to make me ill. I could happily live my entire life being infected with something that isn't going to make me, or anyone else who is vaccinated, feel any symptoms of that infection.

He also asked why the effort put into developing a Covid vaccine was not put into developing one for the common cold? Do people die from the common cold? Maybe that's why there's no incentive to develop one?

Some people seem to spend a lot of their time searching the internet for any irrelevant scrap of 'information' that appears to reinforce the delusions that they are operating under. Then they wonder why no-one takes them seriously.

He also asked why the effort put into developing a Covid vaccine was not put into developing one for the common cold? Do people die from the common cold? Maybe that's why there's no incentive to develop one?

That's where much of the early research in mRNA vaccines was focused on, then got re-purposed for COVID. It was just that the storage requirements of mNRA vaccines made it impractical for widespread against the flu. The way I look at it, is that mRNA vaccines were like jet engines prior to WW2 – the basic research was all done in the 1930s, and it took a war to make the needed development work worth it.

Aussie member of Parliament; end the madness

link

From the article,

"This data shows how Ivermectin knocked their COVID-19 cases and deaths – which we know were Delta Variant – down to almost zero within weeks. A population comparable to the US went from about 35,000 cases and 350 deaths per day to nearly ZERO within weeks of adding Ivermectin to their protocol.

By comparison, the United States is the lower graph. On August 5, here in the good ol' USA, blessed with the glorious vaccines, we have 127,108 new cases per day and 574 new deaths.

Let us look at the August 5 numbers from Uttar Pradesh with 2/3 of our population. Uttar Pradesh, using Ivermectin, had a total of 26 new cases and exactly THREE deaths. The US without Ivermectin has precisely 4889 times as many daily cases and 191 times as many deaths as Uttar Pradesh with Ivermectin."

One anti-vaxxer was VERY keen on bleach. That's an extremely painful method of suicide, not a cure for Covid but it was actually put forward as a "sensible cure". That's just bizarre. All one can say is "just don't do that" and at the same time wonder why someone would even think it is a good idea.

Sounds like a truly horrible person of whom I am unaware. Do you have quotes from this person saying those things? I would like to know more about this.

From the article,

I'm having a hard time tracking the ping-pong ball. The numbers you are quoting are not the numbers you say you can't trust because they are politicized, even though they come from the same source?

coronavirus.jhu.edu/data

A source with multiple warnings on the individual data sets on how not to cross-compare data collected under very different methodologies?

link

Ivermectin Related to 70% of Poison Control Calls

After this report published, the Mississippi State Department issued a health alert warning about an increase in ivermectin poisoning incidents.

"The Mississippi Poison Control Center has received an increasing number of calls from individuals with potential ivermectin exposure taken to treat or prevent COVID-19 infection," the alert said. "At least 70% of the recent calls have been related to ingestion of livestock or animal formulations of ivermectin purchased at livestock supply centers. 85% of the callers had mild symptoms, but one individual was instructed to seek further evaluation due to the amount of ivermectin reportedly ingested."

The alert said "no hospitalizations due to ivermectin toxicity have been directly reported to the Mississippi Poison Control Center or the Mississippi State Department of Health." But MSDH reiterated to Mississippi Free Press reporter Nick Judin today that they had confirmed at least one hospitalization due to ivermectin toxicity, though it had not been reported to the department directly.

link

" You might have heard that the NIH rescinded its ban on ivermectin as a treatment for corona a few weeks ago."
" By the way, they've known as far back as June 2020 that ivermectin is highly effective, safe, and FAST. Goes to work immediately, and wipes out the corona in 48 hours."

Ivermectin Related to 70% of Poison Control Calls

Saying that morons who try to self-medicate with no idea what they are doing reflects the performance of a drug is like saying that people don't wear the risght masks in the right way at the right times reflects on the performance of masks.

NIH rescinded its ban on ivermectin as a treatment

The NIH doesn't ban treatments.

It does decide where the NIH and only the NIH will put medical R&D investments. This kind of misstatement is no different than the malarky about President Bush "banning" stem cell research.

hey've known as far back as June 2020 that ivermectin is highly effective, safe, and FAST. Goes to work immediately, and wipes out the corona in 48 hours.

I'm glad "they" know that. Are they going to share their great insights with everyone else, or keep it a secret?