Kerala now, since days, delivers 80% of all India corona deaths.
In fact for 98% of the India population the Omicron wave is over. The India cases peak (about 312k) has been 10..20x lower than in all vaccine terror states. E.g. France had 360'000 peek with 1/21 population, Netherlands was even worse. The duration of teh wave was 10 weeks. In all vaccine terror states the wave is ongoing as now all the vaccinated get a nice kiss....
To many idiots live in the united states. 90% of the population got an education at a world ranking level behind 30th place and below some development countries.
Such claims over and over again show W's deep contempt of other human beings except his alter ego...sad. BTW - I am not a bot with a cricket brain, so our very expert in computerscience is wrong.
Whats up next ?
Now the Oligarchs just harvest the first jack-pot ( >1 Billion for weapons > 10 billion/day with oil/gas. Unluckily Ukraine did not surrender so they Oligarchs will soon miss a few friends...
But after >100'000 dead Russian soldiers this war certainly will stop and we will then face phase III of the plan...
Omicron was the vaccine for CoV-19 you always develop in parallel for all bio weapon virus. But...
Already now some vaccinated with Omicron die of ADE.
So it's easy to guess. Around July/August when people just started to enjoy live again a sibling of Omicron/Delta lets call it Omega will start to circulate, that will kill 30% of the 3,4x "vaccinated" by induced ADE.
Next guess: The "vaccine" is already ready! And without it you are going to die. What price would you charge/pay and yes there will be much tighter lock downs than you have seen so far...
more relevant to what the US military is up to!).
Announced they ended all LENR research in 2012/13 when it went to NASA under a Space Act Agreement, and the addendum show it being under DoD fast track initiative.
It has never been actually halted.
avy Labs To Reopen The Once Taboo Case On Nuclear Cold Fusion
The research never was halted. This announcement is misleading.
To many idiots live in the united states. 90% of the population got an education at a world ranking level behind 30th place and below some development countries.
This intentional dumbing of the broad US population is one mean to expand the US Oligarchs dominance.
It is sad to see how these under educated now are manipulated by the press and advertising. It's part of the old roman game divide et impera - split and dominate.
Display MoreSorry, TH : that one has been discussed. The headlines say "ivermectin worse for disease progression" ... but almost ignores :
.... and 28-day in-hospital death in 3 (1.2%) vs 10 (4.0%) (RR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.09-1.11; P = .09).
or the fact it was given very late (a week after symptoms), where all the literature on antivirals say they are effective early.
What a horror!! Invalid !!!!!
I'd bet it passes the 80% CI test, which is another way of eliminating the null bias of crossing the no-result line at 1.0. (aka Killed by Statisticians)
Alan, I would agree with some of your criticism except the study was not saying what you say it said! Nor am I! Other bits need to be answered - which I have done below.
From the study:
Question Does adding ivermectin, an inexpensive and widely available antiparasitic drug, to the standard of care reduce the risk of severe disease in patients with COVID-19 and comorbidities?
Findings In this open-label randomized clinical trial of high-risk patients with COVID-19 in Malaysia, a 5-day course of oral ivermectin administered during the first week of illness did not reduce the risk of developing severe disease compared with standard of care alone.
Meaning The study findings do not support the use of ivermectin for patients with COVID-19.
It is not saying ivermectin worse (I don't think anyone has a statistically significant finding of that) - it is all "ivermectin neutral".
Re "within 7 days of symptoms". True, ivermectin might do better if given immediately symptoms start - but that requires everyone to have it in the cupboard at home and use it like aspirin whenever they get a cold. People do not go to a hospital immediately they get COVID symptoms. The trials you need to find out whether ivermectin works taken immediately are the ones where possible patients pre-register, like ACTIV-6 or PRINCIPLE - much larger and more expensive. I am waiting with baited breath for results from those. The PRINCIPLE trial has now resumed ivermectin after its temporary supply issues. Here for why such supply issues are pretty common (my addition - especially in the UK post-Brexit and with lorry shortage). It is inconceivable to me that serious doctors in charge of such a high quality trial would not want any effective treatment to be found as soon as possible, and temporarily pausing ivermectin for supply issues would in any case be a lousy way to prevent such results.
Now your next point is about mortality stats I think.
The mortality rate is so low for COVID that stats from mortality need very large numbers (>> 500) to be meaningful:
Prior randomized clinical trials of ivermectin treatment for patients with COVID-19 and with 400 or more patients enrolled focused on outpatients.16,17 In contrast, the patients in our trial were hospitalized, which permitted the observed administration of ivermectin with a high adherence rate. Furthermore, we used clearly defined criteria for ascertaining progression to severe disease.
Before the trial started, the case fatality rate in Malaysia from COVID-19 was about 1%,25 a rate too low for mortality to be the primary end point in our study. Even in a high-risk cohort, there were 13 deaths (2.7%). A recent meta-analysis of 8 randomized clinical trials of ivermectin to treat SARS-CoV-2 infection, involving 1848 patients with 71 deaths (3.8%), showed that treatment with the drug had no significant effect on survival.26
It is, given the statistical variability, easy to point to specific mortality figures that look good or bad for ivermectin in such a trial. The paper claims that mortality was not a primary outcome (and this should have been stated before the trial was started, whereas progression (via clearly defined criteria) to serious disease was.
That BTW is why trials need to register clear primary outcomes before starting, so you can't cherry-pick the outcome that makes your stuff look good. It this trial was not properly registered, or changed its primary outcome, I will remove it from consideration as flaky - along with many others.
None of the secondary endpoints are statistically significant. You certainly can't say this proves ivermectin does not work, I remain very interested in those big (govt funded) take-it-at-home ivermectin trials.
What you can say is that it is not a slam-dunk for "obviously working" as BIRD etc claim.
The antivaxxer propaganda here is saying that people who have had symptoms for some time and o to hospital should be treated with ivermectin in hospital - and that not to do this is killing them. Those are the conditions of this study and many like it where ivermectin does not work (unless you think the 3 vs 10 death thing is significant - see below). Averaging over RCTs it appears not to be.
One other point against your argument here that the 10% 3 vs 10 deaths thing is real here:
Given the way antivirals work - if you are saying that the lack of efficacy here is because of being administered too late - then it does not make sense for the 28 day death outcomes to be thereby much better than the serious disease progression outcomes - we know antivirals are not effective treatments once you have serious disease. So I agree - it could still work much better if given immediately symptoms start (and also given for any cold etc) but that 3 vs 10 mortality number looks like random numbers.
THH
Re "within 7 days of symptoms". True, ivermectin might do better if given immediately symptoms start - but that requires everyone to have it in the cupboard at home and use it like aspirin whenever they get a cold.
India did dispense 100 million Ziverdo (Zinc, Ivermectin, Doxycycline) kits.
India has a very low death rate and as the control group (Kerala) shows, vaccines only do 200x worse at least, in protecting your live.
Anybody that looks at silly Ivermectin trials just is a fake news dealer or a clown....
BTW the Swedes have shown that the Pfizer produces DNA in liver cells,,
Dr No. I hadn't heard..
Just noticed RB here misleading his physician.
Tut-tut.
THH
so our very expert
can you bot some other expert as well? bitte
misleading his physician.
He thanked me... probably wants me to keep going there
Dr Owen Kwon | North Ryde Medical Centre
Dr .So why don't you want to take the Pfizer booster.... it's routine. advised
Me. No long term data on mRNA vaccines... protein based vaccines have a much longer safety record
Dr You know of course that there has been some myocarditis with Novavax..
,,but less than with the Pfizer
Me Yes.. I checked..there is even myocarditis with the DTP vaccine,,one or two
Dr I didn't know that
Me Btw Dr do you aspirate?
Dr Well Its not routine now. And some people say its less comfortable
would you like me to aspirate
Me Yes.please . Risk reduction.and all that. Society today..so comfort -oriented,,
I heard that Germany has switched over to aspiration..
BTW the Swedes have shown that the Pfizer produces DNA in liver cells,,
Dr No. I hadn't heard..
Me Of course ,,these are just in vitro cells. not whole humans...
I thought it must be a bit boring for the doctor doing intramusculars all day long..
and the aspiration...? didn't notice a thing..
and I shall take ivermectin with me on the plane to New Zealand
next week . just in case,,
What can we tell from PRINCIPLE or the other active big tests about ivermectin?
They have a precise protocol for what results are significant enough to announce Interim results.
So the longer we go without an announcement on ivermectin, the more we can bound its effectiveness.
I'd reckon we are beyond the 30% mortality vimprovement stage given how quickly other results have come out - but it is a bit difficult to tell because omicron on a well-vaccinated UK population has low hospitalisation and mortality, so we don't really know how much data is being accumulated.
What can we tell from PRINCIPL
pinpoint exactly where RB was "misleading his physician"
the old sly THH principle in action
the old sly THH principle in action
Parrots have a brain... but don't know how they use it...
Hope and Faith with Russell...
flamboyant... but definitely not sly
and definitely uses his brain
Top comment from responses
The biggest problem is there is no money in natural immunity.
I have had 3 shots..2 AstraZeneca and 1 Novavax..
no natural immunity yet...
The biggest problem is there is no money in natural immunity.
The biggest problem is that dead people don't get natural immunity.
The biggest problem is that dead people don't get natural immunity.
even if they have been vaccinated
If anybody is interested in IH happenings, their UK subsidiary LUX energy has filed some new documents.
... "their UK subsidiary LUX energy"?
No open correlation, probable missfit from long ago wrong coincidence posted on AR supporting sites
