Ivermectin, for the interested

[Fair Hill]

I hear you.

And counter in similar vein: why should I believe an SD vet or GP over the world's most published authority on cardiology?

Wonderfully, McCullough lampoons those who decry the repurposing of drugs: in the field of medicine that has ever been the case.

Even better: McCullough [who treated covid patients from the beginning and is himself a survivor] declares the opinion of doctors who have not treated covid patients as questionable.

Peter McCullough MD

Dr. Peter Andrew McCullough is an American cardiologist. He was vice chief of internal medicine at Baylor University Medical Center and a professor at Texas A&M University. He is editor-in-chief of th

rumble.com

Secondly, opinion is two-a-penny. Actual patient numbers/deaths? Now we can all agree on that empiricism, surely?

Take a look at Israel, Iceland, Uttar Pradesh. Look up UK ONS stats. Drop opinion, get out your calculator.

Is this the same Doctor?

Looks like it is...

Lawsuit: Doc Using Old Baylor Affiliation While Dishing COVID Vax Falsehoods

Baylor Scott & White Health says Peter McCullough, MD, used former title during media interviews

www.medpagetoday.com

 

[Foxyboy43]

A direct link to the ‘rubbish’:

33 districts in Uttar Pradesh are now Covid-free: State govt

Overall, the state has a total of 199 active cases, while the positivity rate came down to less than 0.01 per cent.

www.hindustantimes.com

Not a bad result for a population 3times the size of the UK, but with roughly half the population vaccinated.
As you were.

Ahem! Really? Quoting “statistics” to back an ongoing heavily criticised and medically disproven point from a dubious convenient source in a still largely third-world country with the scale of problems it has, not least of which is health care and the nuclear bomb! I really don’t think so!

From wikipedia:-
Uttar Pradesh has a large public as well as private healthcare infrastructure. Although an extensive network of public and private sector healthcare providers has been built, the available health infrastructure is inadequate to meet the demand for health services in the state.[271] In 15 years to 2012–13, the population of Uttar Pradesh increased by more than 25 per cent. The public health centres, which are the frontline of the government's health care system, decreased by 8 per cent.[272] Smaller sub-centres, the first point of public contact, increased by no more than 2 per cent over the 25 years to 2015, a period when the population grew by more than 51 per cent.[272]The state is also facing challenges such as a shortage of healthcare professionals, increasing cost of healthcare, the mushrooming of private healthcare and a lack of planning.[273] As of 2017, number of government hospital in rural and urban areas of Uttar Pradesh are 4442 (39104 beds) and 193 (37156 beds), respectively.[274]

A newborn in Uttar Pradesh is expected to live four years fewer than in the neighbouring state of Bihar, five years fewer than in Haryana and seven years fewer than in Himachal Pradesh. Uttar Pradesh contributed to the largest share of almost all communicable and noncommunicable disease deaths, including 48 per cent of all typhoid deaths (2014); 17 per cent of cancer deaths and 18 per cent of tuberculosis deaths (2015).[272] Uttar Pradesh's maternal mortality ratio is higher than the national average at 258 maternal deaths for every 100,000 live births (2017), with 62 per cent of pregnant women unable to access minimum ante-natal care.[275][276] Around 42 per cent of pregnant women, more than 1.5 million, deliver babies at home. About two-thirds (61 per cent) of childbirths at home in Uttar Pradesh are unsafe.[277] State has the highest child mortality indicators,[278]from the neonatal mortality rate (NNMR) to the under-five mortality rate of 64 children who die per 1,000 live births before five years of age, 35 die within a month of birth, and 50 do not complete a year of life.[279] A third of the rural population in the state has been deprived of primary healthcare infrastructure, according to the norms of the Indian Public Health Standards.[280]

 

[Rewulf]

And all of this has been proven to be fake and this treatment has caused more deaths in South America as it spreads complacency.

It hasnt been PROVEN to be fake, and wheres the proof its caused 'more deaths' in South America ?
You are now spreading fake news, because something severely bothers you about ivermectin... Is it a Dr thing ? Do as I say , dont question me, the drug company says its fine , so it is .

As a doctor I have taken an oath to protect people as much as I can and for this reason I ask Admin for the sake if the population please close this thread for ever.

Why ?
If people want to try different methods of treating covid, then let them, its a CHOICE , unlike the vaccine , which in many places is NOT a choice.
Again , read the title of the thread, if youre not interested, move on.

Is this the same Doctor?

Looks like it is...

So his previous employer doesnt like what hes saying, so hes not allowed to say he used to work for them ?
It doesnt exactly destroy his medical qualifications does it , or make his opinion less valid.

 

[big ears]

It hasnt been PROVEN to be fake, and wheres the proof its caused 'more deaths' in South America ?
You are now spreading fake news, because something severely bothers you about ivermectin... Is it a Dr thing ? Do as I say , dont question me, the drug company says its fine , so it is .

Why ?
If people want to try different methods of treating covid, then let them, its a CHOICE , unlike the vaccine , which in many places is NOT a choice.
Again , read the title of the thread, if youre not interested, move on.

So his previous employer doesnt like what hes saying, so hes not allowed to say he used to work for them ?
It doesnt exactly destroy his medical qualifications does it , or make his opinion less valid.

Perhaps you should take time to sit down and critically appraise all the evidence if you can not just take others word for it.
There is proof that the use of ivermectin in South America caused people to behave as if they were immune and also reduce uptake if the vaccine. This lead to a higher death rate in these areas.
From your vaccine comments you are clearly someone who is an antivaxer and therefore spreading false news in an attempt to spread a minority belief.
When you have looked after, treated and seen die patients with Covid you may change your views or though I doubt it.
Your attitude towards the medical profession is also the contempt I have seen creep into some parts of society. The NHS workers have and continue to work beyond what is needed during this crisis which continues despite what many think. Yet still some will not choose to listen and are abusive when it differs from their views, but I bet are the first to criticise the medical profession when things do not turn out the way you think they should.
Keep on with your horse parasite treat if you wish but please stop trying to persuade others it’s a good idea. If I behaved like that with treatments the GMC would discipline me perhaps the same level of scrutiny should be applied to others.

 

[J@son]

over the world's most published authority on cardiology?

If I understand Zambezi correctly, he (or she!) believes Peter McCullough is the world's most publish authority on cardiology. This raises two questions for me:

most published: can you evidence this claim? Is he really the expert you think him to be? "Most published" is a big claim and I think there's every chance it's nonsese.

cardiology: why would a cadiologist be qualified (over and above any other doctor or medical professional) to express an expert opinion on a virus that attacks the respiratory system? Does his (alleged) expertise make him an expert in this area? I cannot see how it does.

So I suspect the answer to both questions is "no". But I suspect that this does not matter to you. Rational arguments simply don't work against irrational beliefs.

 

[Rewulf]

Perhaps you should take time to sit down and critically appraise all the evidence if you can not just take others word for it.

There is evidence ivermectin worked very well in the Indian states where it was used , with government authority, is this not good enough for you ?
There is no evidence it DOESNT work, because no official body has bothered to do a proper study, any unofficial studies have been rubbished because well, they werent official.

There is proof that the use of ivermectin in South America caused people to behave as if they were immune and also reduce uptake if the vaccine. This lead to a higher death rate in these areas.

That is not the same as the way you put it though is it ?
You insinuated it had directly lead to their deaths.
In effect though, it is heresay , and I very much doubt it could be proved as you say it is.

From your vaccine comments you are clearly someone who is an antivaxer and therefore spreading false news in an attempt to spread a minority belief.

Well, clearly you are wrong, Ive had my jabs, Im not anti vax in any way shape or form.
I am highly critical of the way its been rolled out , and the semi compulsory factors therein.
As far as spreading 'false news' , Ive not spread anything, YOU have made false claims on a subject that is of interest, because YOU dont agree with its benefits.
Yet hundreds of millions of people worldwide have used it , and benefitted from it, I will go as far as to say, it has saved millions of lives, yet you , with no knowledge other than what you have read in medical journals and media , refute this.
If it were so clear that ivermectin was absolutely useless at fighting covid, why are there still millions still using it , why is it still officially sanctioned by many governments ?

Lets be clear on this , I personally do not, and do not know anyone who has used ivermectin for treating covid.
Would I use it myself, no.
So please dont accuse me of touting its use.

When you have looked after, treated and seen die patients with Covid you may change your views or though I doubt it.

Ive had covid, not pleasant.
If I were older, it could be extremely unpleasant, but so can many things.
And Ive seen plenty of people die, young and old, so dont judge someone you have never known.

Your attitude towards the medical profession is also the contempt I have seen creep into some parts of society.

Why do you think there is such a lack of trust and the contempt you perceive ?
Are we all flat earthers because we have lost faith in the church of the NHS.?
When people are dying of cancer and heart disease because they cannot get treatment.
When people who DID die of diseases other than covid last year, and had covid put on their death certs ?
Those who really would like to see their GP , and not have a faceless conversation,given appointments for 3+months time ?
Those who went into hospital and contracted covid , because they got put on a ward full of covid patients , some died because of this.

All these things add up to lack of trust in the NHS and its staff.

Keep on with your horse parasite treat if you wish but please stop trying to persuade others it’s a good idea.

As above , Ive tried to persuade no one, and no one on this thread has, I would suggest you read the thread title, and its content again.
The thread is of interest to me, for various reasons, but I dont read an article and immediately want to do whats in it , or promote it.

Learn to be objective.

 

[J@son]

Yet hundreds of millions of people worldwide have used it , and benefitted from it, I will go as far as to say, it has saved millions of lives, yet you , with no knowledge other than what you have read in medical journals and media, refute this

So to be clear: Rewulf's reason for doubting Big Ears's judgement is that Big Ears, a medical professional, gets his information from medical journals and the mainstream media.

Just checking.. because I think this goes to the heart of the issue here.

And that this: that this isn't really about Invermectin.

This is about whether, on a simple and fundamental level, people trust the consensus or look to reject it - precisely because it is the consensus.

Rewulf's reasons for thinking that Big Ears' has got this all wrong are precisely the reasons why I think Big Ears is right.

I am not saying that all doctors are always right all of the time. We know that this is not the case. But I am saying that a doctor who reads medical journals and follows the mainstream media is more likely to be right (at least when it comes to medical stuff) than someone who isn't medically qualified, doesn't read medical journals and rejects the mainstream media.

If you disagree with this statement, you disagree in a fundamental sense with the idea of mainstream consensus and I suspect your views on Invermectin are likely to be a reflection of this position rather than anything else.

 

[Foxyboy43]

nuff said!

 

[Dr. Strangelove]

I am running out of popcorn at this rate…. Wait until the media report on that as a national shortage!

 

[zambezi]

I am saying that a doctor who reads medical journals and follows the mainstream media

With you on part A. Pretty confident part B is the problem.

How about the opinion of a medical professional working in the relevant field?

Senate Testimony

This page highlights the senate testimony of FLCCC founders for the treatment of COVID-19 using widely available, cheap medications.

covid19criticalcare.com

How about the vaccine concerns of the creator of the mRNA transport?

youtube.com/watch?v=9E2UkhCWosg&t=921s

 

[Rewulf]

And that this: that this isn't really about Invermectin.

Im sorry , but this thread is about ivermectin, you can try and turn it into 'They are trying to make me take ivermectin !!' hence 'They are antivaxxers !' hence 'They wear foil hats and think the earth is flat' if you like, but no one has said that.
If an alternative therapy makes you feel so threatened , theres nothing I can do about that, but ask you to examine your thought processes.

Ivermectin was/is used in some countries because vaccines were unavailable or too expensive, and they worked well enough for that purpose, if you believe that to be a lie , or inaccurate , again , examine the thought process that lead you to that conclusion.

This is about whether, on a simple and fundamental level, people trust the consensus or look to reject it - precisely because it is the consensus.

The 'concensus' appears to differ from country to country though does it not ?
So in this sense, the countries who can afford the vaccine, and are actively mass jabbing, sometimes using coercion, dismiss ivermectin as a quack , dangerous treatment, 'for horses'
In countries where vaccines are less affordable/available , ivermectin is prescribed and actively promoted by the government, its usually already been used for other pre covid ailments, and err, is not just for horses !

Rewulf's reasons for thinking that Big Ears' has got thisall wrong are precisely the reasons why I think Big Ears is right.

I am not saying that all doctors are always right all of the time. We know that this is not the case. But I am saying that a doctor who reads medical journals and follows the mainstream media is more likely to be right (at least when it comes to medical stuff) than someone who isn't medically qualified, doesn't read medical journals and rejects the mainstream media.

If you disagree with this statement, you disagree in a fundamental sense with the idea of mainstream consensus and I suspect your views on Invermectin are likely to be a reflection of this position rather than anything else.

Its not about doctors though , if a drug company passes a drug for use and says it safe, doctors prescribe it, for what they THINK is wrong with the patient.
There have been many times, those doctors prescribed drugs and harm has been caused.

So when a DOCTOR says ,' I know this drug is safe, I read about it in a medical journal that it was' its like me reading the paper and believing the days headline, How do I know its true ?
Consensus is just that , 'accepted belief' just like accepted belief in this country is that ivermectin has no beneficial use in treating covid, whereas is India , you will get a different response entirely.
The difference is , in India , ivermectin has been extensively used.

If you find this assessment illogical, then you must really believe every single thing you believe within mainstream consensus.

 

[Foxyboy43]

Enuff already! Quick hypothetical question - someone you love dearly will get C19 - you can choose only one of two ”medications” - either the Pfizer jab or I(n)vermectin? Only you can decide - make your call - now. And your answer is………

 

[zambezi]

Enuff already! Quick hypothetical question - someone you love dearly will get C19 - you can choose only one of two ”medications” - either the Pfizer jab or I(n)vermectin? Only you can decide - make your call - now. And your answer is………

That encapsulates the crux of this debacle: your question suggests someone other than the recipient should decide their medication. That is a departure from all norms. And wholly unacceptable given risk-benefit analysis per strata of society. Ivermectin is both a viable RNA replication disruptor, and simultaneously a rally point for those who cherish freedom.


Removing the third party aspect of your question...

If I was going to be exposed to SARS-CoV-2 again, I would not need the vaccine as I have already suffered prolonged covid and have natural immunity.

If I did, however unlikely, develop severe symptoms from re-infection, I would use whatever regime FLCCC/McCullough/competent medicos are using to mitigate symptoms and aid my immune system.

 

[mealiejimmy]

Its not about doctors though , if a drug company passes a drug for use and says it safe, doctors prescribe it, for what they THINK is wrong with the patient.
There have been many times, those doctors prescribed drugs and harm has been caused.

Drug companies DO NOT decide if the public can be prescribed the drugs they develop - governmental medical agencies such as the JCVI and FDA make recommendations to governments upon which such decisions are made.

Cheers

Bruce

 

[Rewulf]

Enuff already! Quick hypothetical question - someone you love dearly will get C19 - you can choose only one of two ”medications” - either the Pfizer jab or I(n)vermectin? Only you can decide - make your call - now. And your answer is………

As a preventative , I would choose the vaccine.

If they already have it , ivermectin MIGHT work better.
As I said , would I take it? , no.

Its not about doctors though , if a drug company passes a drug for use and says it safe, doctors prescribe it, for what they THINK is wrong with the patient.
There have been many times, those doctors prescribed drugs and harm has been caused.

Drug companies DO NOT decide if the public can be prescribed the drugs they develop - governmental medical agencies such as the JCVI and FDA make recommendations to governments upon which such decisions are made.

Cheers

Bruce

I didnt say they did.

But IF a drug is considered 'safe' by testing and 'consensus' , the doctor can prescribe it , even though he/she knows little about it.

 

[mealiejimmy]

Prescribing unlicensed medicines

Unlicensed medicines are commonly used in some areas of medicine, such as in paediatrics, psychiatry and palliative care. From our Good practice in prescribing and managing medicines and devices guidance.

www.gmc-uk.org

Doctors may prescribe unlicensed medicines, but do so at their own risk.
So how many UK doctors are telling their patients to use Ivermection rather than getting vaccinated?
Very few I fancy, and those that do and have patients subsequently die with Covid should be struck off.

Cheers

Bruce

 

[Freeforester]

Out of interest, both the Moderna and Pfizer jabs are currently under investigation in several countries, with regard to the ’temporal correlation’ with their use and co-incidence of Myocarditis and pericarditis, especially among young people, in the countries concerned. Just sayin’…



US: see #458, from the Pfizer guy.

btw, remind us - how did the ‘consensus’ thing go back in the thirties? Or for the many outliers in scientific progress, throughout time - I’m all for scientific discussion, but I see less and less of it from the ‘usual antagonists’ - care to explain away the modes of function, or expose Marik, Kory and all then many other frontline Doctors advocating and using the product (first used on humans, the use in horses etc came in later, remember) as the charlatans you imply? It would hopefully make a useful change to the merit and tone of the discussion for the interested.

 

[Jgray]

 

[Jgray]

Sorry wrong thread, should have been in vinyl Friday

 

[Foxyboy43]

That encapsulates the crux of this debacle: your question suggests someone other than the recipient should decide their medication. That is a departure from all norms. And wholly unacceptable given risk-benefit analysis per strata of society. Ivermectin is both a viable RNA replication disruptor, and simultaneously a rally point for those who cherish freedom.


Removing the third party aspect of your question...

If I was going to be exposed to SARS-CoV-2 again, I would not need the vaccine as I have already suffered prolonged covid and have natural immunity.

If I did, however unlikely, develop severe symptoms from re-infection, I would use whatever regime FLCCC/McCullough/competent medicos are using to mitigate symptoms and aid my immune system.

Okay I give up. Some you win - wotever…..
I’m out of here.