Coronavirus Outbreak

[Tiger5150]

Genuinely stunned the world isnt rising up about this. Actually could be crime of the century.

A drug exists that has been proven in double blind controlled trials to have equivalent or better preventative efficacy than the Pfizer vaccine and also a very effective treatment. This drug has over 50years of safety and testing with almost no side effects.

*"Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective) has continually proved to be astonishingly safe for human use. Indeed, it is such a safe drug, with minimal side effects, that it can be administered by non-medical staff and even illiterate individuals in remote rural communities, provided that they have had some very basic, appropriate training."*

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3043740/

It could literally end the pandemic but it is being actively suppressed. Currently being used with great effect in some states in India (Goa) and South America.

https://youtu.be/Tn_b4NRTB6k

Yes well that would be ironic if the "crime of the century" were something that does not seem to involve a crime at all...

"Crime of the Century"may or may not be hyperbolic, time will tell I hope but we'll get to that. I obviously stole that from the title of the video.

From what I've read the effectiveness of it as revealed by studies is far from clear: some suggest it is effective and others suggest it is not. The quality of the evidence in the studies is also highly variable.

It seems fairly clear that it is safe to use, but far less clear that it is actually effective in treating/preventing contraction of COVID-19. If people go taking it as a substitute for a vaccine and it turns out that it is **not** effective then that's going to be pretty dangerous for them.

With respect Nelson, that is completely wrong and Ill explain why its wrong and not your fault you are wrong (it also explains in the video).

There have been 56 Trials, 28 Randomised Control Trials involving 484 scientists, 18447 patients. All of these trials can be found here (including analysis of data, where there are flaws etc).

https://c19ivermectin.com/

These studies all show remarkable positive results (95-97% positive result). Prophylactic studies show average of 85% efficacy up to 91% which is better than Astra Zeneca and close to Pfizer. Some studies in hospitals in India and Argentina (non clinical) have returned results of 100% efficacy in numbers over 4000. Studies show treatment with Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective) has between 45 and 85% improvement against a control group depending on stage of disease and use of Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective) in the Clinical Trials had a reduction in Mortality of 74%. An independent meta analysis of all 56 studies identifies these results here.

https://ivmmeta.com/

There is tons of good scientific data proving Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective) is safe and effective. In addition to this clinical and hospital data, there are many countries and states/regions that have independently started distributing Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective) with immediate and impressive results Goa is one example, a state in Mexico, many countries in South America. Peru is a famous example where they started using Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective) ($3 a dose) and all case rates, hospitalisations and deaths plummeted, then the PResident banned Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective) and mandated Rendesivir ($2K a dose) and rates have skyrocketed again.

https://ivmstatus.com/

So why have you "read" that the evidence is sketchy on Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective) as you stated above? If you do a quick google, you will find many sites including "official" sites like WHO who warn that there is insufficient data and evidence surrounding Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective). Why is that?

Leaving out any (plausible) evil, conspiratorial reasons around "big Pharma" etc, there is an actual reasonably innocent and factual reason why. The majority (possibly all, I havent checked) of the studies and clinical trials listed in that link are what is called "pre-print". They are legitimate scientific findings with factual information including transparency regarding methodology, statistic etc, how ever they can not be termed "published" until they have been through a long peer review process. The obvious reason that these cases and trials are still "pre-print" and not fully peer reviewed yet is time, most of these trials are around 3months old and it typically takes 18months or so for peer review. So technically it is correct to state there is not sufficient "published" trials to support the case however with millions dying, thousands a day, I'd suggest it is crazy to disregard this option.

So based on what Ive posted that these trials are "pre-print" you may say...."there you go, case closed its not fully proven yet" and obviously there is logic there, but based on that logic, guess what else is not proven on that basis? All of the Vaccines.

All of the vaccines did not go through the full peer review component of the clinical trials. The vaccines did not undergo the same process that Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective) is required to go through. In order to get the vaccines out as fast as possible, they were given Emergency Use Authorisation (EUA) by the FDA which short cuts the process and enables approval of the drugs without the full review process. The kicker in this is that in order to get the EUA, the vaccine developers had to prove that *"there are no adequate, approved, and available alternatives"*. Could that explain the suppression of information regarding Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective) (that would be where the Crime of the Century comes in)?

 

[Tiger5150]

Genuinely stunned the world isnt rising up about this. Actually could be crime of the century.

A drug exists that has been proven in double blind controlled trials to have equivalent or better preventative efficacy than the Pfizer vaccine and also a very effective treatment. This drug has over 50years of safety and testing with almost no side effects.

*"Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective) has continually proved to be astonishingly safe for human use. Indeed, it is such a safe drug, with minimal side effects, that it can be administered by non-medical staff and even illiterate individuals in remote rural communities, provided that they have had some very basic, appropriate training."*

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3043740/

It could literally end the pandemic but it is being actively suppressed. Currently being used with great effect in some states in India (Goa) and South America.

https://youtu.be/Tn_b4NRTB6k

What's to be gained by not using it? Out of patent therefore worth nothing to the drug companies?

That is the obvious demotivation plus the need to recover the hundreds of millions invested in vaccines.

There are other possible motives to not use or suppress it. As I spelled out in my other post, the Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective) trials arent completely mature yet, but they are more mature than the vaccine trials and vaccines are obviously approved for use. The way vaccines got fast tracked and didnt go through the normal process is that the vaccine developers received Emergency Use Authorisation (EUA) from the FDA. One of the criteria that needs to be met to achieve the EUA is that *"there are no adequate, approved, and available alternatives"*. Would not help the development of the vaccines if information was widely known that there is a repurposed drug available that had 70 years of safety records with no significant side effects that could be made quickly at $3 per dose with a similar efficacy to the vaccines.

I am intentionally slow assume conspiratorial motives but a lot of what is going on around the publicising the information of this drug is troubling. The Frontline Covid Critical Care Alliance (https://covid19criticalcare.com/) is a group of ICU specialist and physicians who have been collating, analysing and publishing therapeutics for Covid have been banned from Twitter for talking about Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective). These are not Qanon people, one of them is responsible for discovering the "recovery" protocol (get ICU patients off ventilators and onto high does steriod treatment) which has saved millions of lives. If you post about Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective) on FB the post will be deleted. A few posts above, I posted a video of Dr Kory addressing the US Senate Enquiry Hearing into COVID treatments, all he does is list the studies that have been done and their results and the video is available on Vimeo (as posted), C-Span (because it was a speech in the US Senate) but has been banned on Youtube. The question has to be asked at some stage....why?

 

[Tiger5150]

Whilst im on my Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective) riddled hobby horse, pursuing Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective) is not "anti-vax", but Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective) is safer than the vaccines, both in a short term point of view (no known serious side effects over 70 years for Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective) vs blood clots, immune responses etc) and long term (long term known safe for Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective), long term not known for vaccines.

A massive reason for pursuing Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective) is that the vaccine route to safety is long, slow and expensive. Vaccines are not available to everyone. Some cant take it for medical reasons, some wont for personal (right or wrong) reasons, a LOT of people dont have access to vaccines due to location, economics, many reasons.

The longer this pandemic lasts, the more opportunities the virus has to evolve and mutate. As the vaccines roll out slowly, evolutions of the virus that "escape" the vaccines will become more virulent and harder to control. It is likely we will be vaccinating forever and its not impossible that some strains may be hard to vaccinate against. Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective) is cheap, easy to make, easy to distribute, safe to take, easier to sell to anti vaxers etc. Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective) could literally be distributed to the world in a couple of months and the pandemic could literally be over in months.

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

Whilst im on my Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective) riddled hobby horse, pursuing Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective) is not "anti-vax", but Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective) is safer than the vaccines, both in a short term point of view (no known serious side effects over 70 years for Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective) vs blood clots, immune responses etc) and long term (long term known safe for Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective), long term not known for vaccines.

A massive reason for pursuing Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective) is that the vaccine route to safety is long, slow and expensive. Vaccines are not available to everyone. Some cant take it for medical reasons, some wont for personal (right or wrong) reasons, a LOT of people dont have access to vaccines due to location, economics, many reasons.

The longer this pandemic lasts, the more opportunities the virus has to evolve and mutate. As the vaccines roll out slowly, evolutions of the virus that "escape" the vaccines will become more virulent and harder to control. It is likely we will be vaccinating forever and its not impossible that some strains may be hard to vaccinate against. Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective) is cheap, easy to make, easy to distribute, safe to take, easier to sell to anti vaxers etc. Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective) could literally be distributed to the world in a couple of months and the pandemic could literally be over in months.

Certainly food for thought.

 

[mike]

Whilst im on my Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective) riddled hobby horse, pursuing Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective) is not "anti-vax", but Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective) is safer than the vaccines, both in a short term point of view (no known serious side effects over 70 years for Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective) vs blood clots, immune responses etc) and long term (long term known safe for Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective), long term not known for vaccines.

A massive reason for pursuing Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective) is that the vaccine route to safety is long, slow and expensive. Vaccines are not available to everyone. Some cant take it for medical reasons, some wont for personal (right or wrong) reasons, a LOT of people dont have access to vaccines due to location, economics, many reasons.

The longer this pandemic lasts, the more opportunities the virus has to evolve and mutate. As the vaccines roll out slowly, evolutions of the virus that "escape" the vaccines will become more virulent and harder to control. It is likely we will be vaccinating forever and its not impossible that some strains may be hard to vaccinate against. Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective) is cheap, easy to make, easy to distribute, safe to take, easier to sell to anti vaxers etc. Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective) could literally be distributed to the world in a couple of months and the pandemic could literally be over in months.

Certainly worth further consideration and thought. Interesting.

 

[Tiger5150]

I thought I was done, but talking to my partner about this.....

If you remember, my mate in Hungary that rescues bears & wolves and was in ICU with COVID. They gave him Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective) and he turned the corner.

I think Im done now.

 

[hank37w]

I think some authorities in VIC are telling porkies to justify the VIC lockdown. New form of Covid transmission, oh really.

Funny how it's the deadliest, the most contagious, the most uncontrollable, the fastest from onset to transmission but only in Victoria.

It's all South Australia's fault because that's where it came from, but unlike Victoria, there are no new cases there despite the fact that this variety spreads like crazy.

I think that just about everything that comes out of the mouths of Victorian Government representatives are porkies.

 

[hank37w]

I think some authorities in VIC are telling porkies to justify the VIC lockdown. New form of Covid transmission, oh really.

How about you justify your opinion that authorities are telling lies?

Why? Do you think anything is unique in VIC and that there is a new form of transmission or that the incubation time is now less than one day? Because that’s what the VIC govt is saying. I say porkies.

I say you're right on the mark.

 

[DJG]

Well I'm hoping that Covid clears up in Melbourne before June the 19th.

Flying down to see a mate in Melbourne and watching the mighty Tigers trashhhh the Storm on the weekend!

Pray for me mates! I haven't watched a live game since 2010!

I had sorted our flight times and was about to check the NRL ticket once more to see if the had opened up sales as yet, then the cases started to trickle in.

As soon as I was hearing that it was the Kappa variant from a South Australia hotel, it was obvious that a lockdown was going to be necessary. Will see what happens next week and re-evaluate things then, but haven't given up yet.

Edit; Having only been to the old ground more than a decade ago, still hoping to fill some seats in the current stadium in a fortnight or so.

Mate its a kick in the ass really.. I had booked flights to Melbourne this time last year and the same thing happened..

Honestly I just wanted to watch us play live for once.. we dont get many games up here in Darwin!

 

[Rugba]

https://www.smh.com.au/national/scientists-find-no-evidence-strain-is-fast-moving-beast-20210602-p57xfk.html

This .
As I knew the alarmist language by VIC confirmed ,
This was used just to justify their decisions .
Then you all wonder why there is so many skeptics , and conspiracy nuts both in this forum and wider society when you have government lying

 

[InBenjiWeTrust]

interesting, after Dr Fauci and this:


 

[Spud_Murphy]

interesting, after Dr Fauci and this:


No money in it

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

interesting, after Dr Fauci and this:


@Tiger5150 there you go mate. Wonder how long before this becomes a protocol?

 

[TillLindemann]

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2021/06/the-lab-leak-theory-inside-the-fight-to-uncover-covid-19s-origins

This is a must read, from Vanity Fair of all places. Strap yourself in, it's a long read but it's worth it.

 

[Tiger5150]

interesting, after Dr Fauci and this:


@Tiger5150 there you go mate. Wonder how long before this becomes a protocol?

Depends what you consider a protocol. IMO it never will be.

The FIRST study that shows Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective) works was done in Australia, I think it was this one. Nothing has happened since other than active suppression. With regards to it becoming a protocol, it is being actively suppressed by the WHO.

 

[Tiger5150]

Covid has obviously been the biggest global crisis in our lifetime and being a global crisis that has killed millions and impacted probably hundreds of millions, it was so critical that the global and national authorities could be trusted.
https://www.news.com.au/world/coronavirus/global/dr-anthony-faucis-thoughts-in-the-early-days-of-pandemic-revealed-in-4000-released-emails/news-story/10a19d5b20b11fe5371581690c4f3b4a

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/science/bombshell-emails-over-what-anthony-fauci-knew/news-story/39c108c393a660b85dce452e4eb4a6b3

4000 emails to and from Dr Fauci have been released under FOI that prove that he has been lying all the way through the pandemic. For a year Fauci has been saying that the virus definitely came from a zoonotic host and there was no evidence that it came from a lab. He changed his story in May this year. The emails show that in **Feb 2020** the **NIH** informed Fauci that *“look really closely at all the sequences to see that some of the features (potentially) ***look engineered***”*. and that the virus *“inconsistent with expectations from evolutionary theory”.*

The emails also suggest that Fauci is lying regarding his testimony to the US senate where he said that the "NIH did not fund gain of function research" at the WIV Wuhan lab. Instead they funded Ecohealth Alliance and they funded and they carried out gain of function research at WIV. Who owns Ecohealth Alliance? Peter Daszak. Who did the WHO send to investigate whether gain of function research at WIV Wuhan could have been the source?.....Incredible.

Fauci himself admits to lying about masks early in the pandemic.

People wonder how "conspiracy theories" evolve and there is low trust in authorities?

 

[tigger]

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2021/06/the-lab-leak-theory-inside-the-fight-to-uncover-covid-19s-origins

This is a must read, from Vanity Fair of all places. Strap yourself in, it's a long read but it's worth it.

Wow! It certainly is a long read, but worth the effort.

I thought that was a fairly well balanced article. Certainly raises some issues about the potential origin of the Covid 19.

Thanks for posting it.

 

[pawsandclaws1]

Prof Sutton in Victoria claims the Delta strain is very concerning. He than says there is no evidence to suggest it is any more severe in terms of symptoms or mortality. The Vic Govt treats fellow Victorians like they are fools. Enough scaremongering for political gain.

Also the Vic presser left it open this infected Vic family may have picked the virus up in NSW at Jervis Bay😁 Obviously unaware (or were they) NSW had zero cases today and Jervis Bay is ACT'

 

[Tiger5150]

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2021/06/the-lab-leak-theory-inside-the-fight-to-uncover-covid-19s-origins

This is a must read, from Vanity Fair of all places. Strap yourself in, it's a long read but it's worth it.

A great, factual article. No hyperbole, just a collection of the overwhelming evidence and information.